Sentences with phrase «catastrophic result of global warming»

Now we know that the most catastrophic result of global warming could be an abrupt cooling and drying.

The drying up of Lake Chad is used as a prime example of a catastrophic result of global warming.

Not exact matches

The resulting computer simulation is the basis for predicting the catastrophic effects of increasing AGHG on global warming.

According to one of the most extreme opinion expressed by former Vice President and now Noble Laureate Al Gore in his book entitled «An Inconvenient Truth», we can be certain to see catastrophic events such as droughts, floods, epidemics, killer heat waves, etc. as a result of global warming.

Leading climate scientists believe that maintaining carbon dioxide levels in excess of 350 ppm will result in runaway global warming with catastrophic impacts to humans, wildlife and ecosystems.

Christy, a noted skeptic of catastrophic man - made global warming, said his results reinforce his claim that climate models predict too much warming in the troposphere, the lowest five miles of the atmosphere.

For catastrophic global warming skeptics, this past week's U.S. midterm election results produced the euphoria of delightful schadenfreude.

Okay: http://www.skepticalscience.com/global-warming-scientific-consensus-intermediate.htm http://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus/ — Also if you want to argue that it says «catastrophic» — that also says that scientists believe in global warming and the word «catastrophic» is relative — that means this point is completely subjective to whatever — it just says that 3 % believes in catastrophic change — and i said above that «catastrophic» is relative 8) https://www.skepticalscience.com/human-co2-smaller-than-natural-emissions.htm — you can say it produces more but it absorbs the co2 back through photosynthesis — our industrial system doesn't reclaim the co2 it produces so it results in a buildup in co2 9) http://climate.nasa.gov/vital-signs/global-temperature/ — look at the graph 10) I mean kind of but how do they profit?

Earth already has a very complicated but natural system of climate temperature control, technically referred to as emergent climate phenomena, which have the result that catastrophic global warming can not occur.

We used to believe that it was «very likely» that human emissions of CO2 might be causing global warming, and that warming might have catastrophic results.

NCSE isn't composed of scientists or science teachers; it's an activist group devoted, in part, to expounding global warming alarmists» dogma: Humans are causing climate change; the results will be catastrophic; and governments must force people to use less energy and live simpler to prevent future disasters.

Which forms the basis for the IPCC claim of high climate sensitivity (mean value of 3.2 C), resulting in significant global warming (up to 6.4 C warming by 2100), «extreme high sea levels», increased «heat waves», increased «heavy rains» and floods, increased «droughts», increased «intense tropical cyclones» — which, in turn, lead to crop failures, disappearance of glaciers now supplying drinking water to millions, increased vector borne diseases, etc. (for short, potentially catastrophic AGW — or «CAGW»).

They have told the public, politicians, and the press that «global warming» (alias «climate change») is primarily due to human - caused emissions of carbon dioxide, and that if this continues at current levels that this will result in catastrophic global warming.

«After a decade of warnings that the Earth's temperature may be rapidly warming, and that this supposed warming may result in a surge of catastrophic flooding and lethal storms, it now appears that we may be in for global cooling instead.

This noble enterprise has resulted in fame, a Nobel Prize, moral and political power, and funding to scientists and science departments worldwide whose work supports the thesis of high climate sensitivity and likely castastrophic global catastrophic global warming.

As skeptics of catastrophic global warming have long advised, climate change is primarily a result of natural forces that are not dependent on anthropogenic influences.

E.g., research assumes greenhouse gas emissions cause warming without explicitly stating humans are the cause»... carbon sequestration in soil is important for mitigating global climate change» (4a) No position Does not address or mention the cause of global warming (4b) Uncertain Expresses position that human's role on recent global warming is uncertain / undefined «While the extent of human - induced global warming is inconclusive...» (5) Implicit rejection Implies humans have had a minimal impact on global warming without saying so explicitly E.g., proposing a natural mechanism is the main cause of global warming»... anywhere from a major portion to all of the warming of the 20th century could plausibly result from natural causes according to these results» (6) Explicit rejection without quantification Explicitly minimizes or rejects that humans are causing global warming»... the global temperature record provides little support for the catastrophic view of the greenhouse effect» (7) Explicit rejection with quantification Explicitly states that humans are causing less than half of global warming «The human contribution to the CO2 content in the atmosphere and the increase in temperature is negligible in comparison with other sources of carbon dioxide emission»»

The resulting computer simulation is the basis for predicting the catastrophic effects of increasing AGHG on global warming.

And the result will be ever - escalating wars for control of dwindling oil supplies, ever - escalating destruction of ecosystems, and irreversible, runaway catastrophic global warming, until the whole house of cards that constitutes the present - day «American way of life» collapses, in a very painful and ugly fashion.

According to Ho, if the past changes are a result of global warming, it can be assumed that in future more catastrophic tropical cyclones will strike East Asia than ever before.

Here, we see that Steve McIntyre is able to make reliable predictions of a climate scientist's actions using the simple prediction heuristic «if the study does not end up getting published, it means that the results did not support the catastrophic man - made global warming proposition.»