Sentences with phrase «average citizens understand»

In a lame effort to fill out the TRNN video with other material which looked like fossil fuel industry orchestrating things, a line from the American Petroleum Institute's 1998 leaked «Global Climate Science Communications Team» memo was highlighted, while the narrator read it: «Victory will be achieved when average citizens understand uncertainties in climate science.»

In 1998, the American Petroleum Institute developed an internal Communications Action Plan that stated: Victory will be achieved when & average citizens understand uncertainties in climate science & [and] recognition of uncertainties becomes part of the conventional wisdom.

Victory will be achieved when: • Average citizens understand uncertainties.

«Victory will be achieved when average citizens understand uncertainties in climate science...»

Not exact matches

This is, as I say, a new legal situation which neither politicians nor average citizens fully understand.

Given its pervasiveness in our lives — most studies indicate that the average citizen watches over 20 hours a week — it is important that research on a national and impartial level be undertaken, so that we can understand TV's effects.

While a big topic to consider, if we average citizens are expected to understand its outcomes / effects and vote accordingly, I would hope that it should be possible to summarize the answer to this question in the Stack Exchange format.

The average citizen out there is more interested in understanding who the person is and what his or her attitudes are.

To read King Lear and Hamlet today, and understand that average citizens of Elizabethan London considered such plays entertainment, not daunting puzzles, is to understand what a downward slide we're on linguistically.

No I am not a vet nor a breeder, I am a an average American grandparent who has always understood reproduction as do my children and I RESPECT my fellow citizens.

* Average citizens «understand» (recognize) uncertainties in climate science; recognition of uncertainties becomes part of the «conventional wisdom» * Media «understands» (recognizes) uncertainties in climate science * Media coverage reflects balance on climate science and recognition of the validity of viewpoints that challenge the current «conventional wisdom» * Industry senior leadership understands uncertainties in climate science, making them stronger ambassadors to those who shape climate policy * Those promoting the Kyoto treaty on the basis of extent science appears to be out of touch with reality.

My questions, the answers to which I may have missed in this string, are how can one relate the forcing at 2XCO2 to an expected atmospheric temperature rise in a way that a citizen can understand; and is the forcing as stated as a degree C to be compared with the forcing at 280 ppm (pre industrial) NOT with today's measured temperature or rise above average?

«Victory will be achieved when... average citizens «understand» (recognize) uncertainties in climate science; recognition of uncertainties becomes part of the «conventional wisdom».»

One of the many things that puzzle me as non scientific citizen of average scientific knowledge in trying to follow the debate concerning AGW is understanding how, given the many «low» levels of uncertainty admitted by most experts, can anyone claim to «know» such a complex question?

With the exception of the 1991 ICE memos — which I will get to shortly — the next most favored leaked memo phrase is the one out of the 1998 API documents, «Victory will be achieved when... Average citizens «understand» (recognize) uncertainties in climate science...» That isn't a sinister industry directive, it is a basic truism.

As the company put it in a secret 1998 memo helping establish one of the innumerable front groups that spread climate disinformation, «Victory will be achieved when average citizens «understand» (recognize) uncertainties in climate science,» and when «recognition of uncertainty becomes part of the «conventional wisdom.»»

Demonstrate how the accusation, led by a particular small clique of enviro - activists, potentially strayed into libel / slander territory with the intent to hoodwink the public, and you instead have a potentially monstrous courtroom drama backfire situation that any average citizen can understand.

According to the plan «Victory will be achieved when average citizens «understand» (recognize) uncertainties in climate science; recognition of uncertainties becomes part of the «conventional wisdom».»

«Victory Will Be Achieved for Greenpeace When,» among other things, «Average citizens «understand» (recognize) certainties in climate science,» public «recognition of certainty becomes part of the «conventional wisdom.»»

After all, the average citizen should be able to access and understand the laws of the land regardless of her means or inclination toward lawyers, particularly in respect of laws carrying penal, economic or social consequences.

It seems to me that central idea here is that legislation should be intelligible on its face, or, more specifically, that the average citizen, possessed of average intellect, average education and average fluency in an official language, should be able to read and understand the text of a particular piece of legislation as well as its application to her circumstances.

Many parents in Chicago fear for the safety of their children when they being to drive, understanding that operating a vehicle is one of the most dangerous activities that an average citizen will engage in during a typical year.

For example, at Love Canal, in Western New York, toxic pollution had been accumulating for decades (since well before the 1940s), but average citizens only started to understand that it was putting them at risk in the 1960s, and the true extent of the environmental disaster was not recognized until a New York State agency organized a large scale scientific investigation in 1977 using newly developed forensic chemistry techniques to quantify the extent to which people were exposed to toxic chemicals.