Sentences with phrase «care about climate science»

Not exact matches

As someone working somewhere in the midst of that nexus of «science, values, ethics and politics» you describe (economics, international relations, technology... the climate policy list goes on), I do recognise what you're talking about, but I really don't see that we should very much care.

Perhaps you would care to explain exactly how these alleged «past exaggerations of climate predictions» compelled numerous GOP elected officials to deliberately and repeatedly lie about climate science, while seeking to abuse their positions of authority to defund climate research and attack and destroy the careers of leading climate scientists.

As I wrote in January, when a columnist really cares about something — as was the case with Will's assault on climate science — he really puts his shoulder to it in repeated volleys.

If someone is getting their climate science from a politician (e.g. Monckton or Gore), well that is a sign that they care more about the politics than the science.

I don't place much stock, however, in formal credentials (and mine certainly have little directly to do with «climate science»); I care more about the substance of a man's speech, thoughts and actions than what's on paper or the laurels he sports.

I know this new paper is not likely to get much press, but now that Cook's «research» has been exposed as «mierda», hopefully more voters will finally realize just how little the President really knows (or cares) about climate science.

In the current political climate, Robin Bell, a research professor at Columbia's Lamont - Doherty Earth Observatory, and president - elect of the American Geophysical Union, said scientists need to ``... continue to articulate how science is key to what the new administration cares about: intelligent investment in infrastructure, national security, public health.

While climate science is most uncertain when it comes to the regional - scale impacts we care most about, we have a fair idea of the range of likely impacts in store for us now.

While the climate science community may be interested in only the latest and greatest models, the rest of the world cares about your track record for accuracy.

If we really care about the climate we should allows each member of these societies to count 20 hours of effort analyzing the climate science literature, data and papers as a tax deductible charitable effort at say DC Lobbyist bill rates..

Climate science doesn't care much about raw measurement data any more.

The majority don't even understand the science or they don't even care about climate (or tobacco).

If you don't care about climate change and you think that nuclear power plants pose some unique danger, which the science does not support at all, then maybe you don't care.

I've seen the sort of thing going on in climate science also occurring in elementary - particle physics, but most citizens do not care (or know) about that, because it has no significant political or economic implications.

Climate scientists have become so talebanically fanatical about crushing resistance to a flawed hypothesis that they want to be a fact that they do not care how much damage they do to science.

We have a larger, open - ended responsibility to speak truth to power, and to tell the public and policymakers, in plain English, why they should care about the science of climate change, and what this science tells us;

Clinton won 90 % 4 of this metro constituency (note: these voters really don't care about climate change or honest science - understandably, they just want to simply survive their concrete hellholes on a day - to - day basis).

Rather, the allegations are part of politically motivated character assassination attacks aimed at individual climate scientists, by people who don't really care about science at all, but who dislike climate policy and the idea of reducing emissions.