Sentences with phrase «cause of climate change because»

Leaking refrigerants are a major cause of climate change because they predominantly consist of two families of synthetic manmade chemicals called hydrochlorofluorocarbons (HCFCs)-- both ozone depleting substances and super greenhouse gases (GHGs)-- and hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs)-- powerful GHGs...

Humans are the main cause of climate change because were the one who burn fossil fuels that contribute large amount which releases carbon dioxide gas to the atmosphere and clear trees that absorb carbon dioxide, sending heat trapping gases into the atmosphere.

Not exact matches

I can explain climate change as a result of a natural cycle caused by the masses and orbits of the planets, but I don't go around calling believers in humans causing climate change idiots simply because I know what actually causes it.

Because protesting against climate change and animal cruelty can be ways of expressing anger and discontent with the capitalist establishment, whereas the cause for nature is fuelled merely by love of wildlife.

The question of whether or not humans cause climate change matters because for many people an answer of «no» will remove the need to act, and even if the answer is «yes» it helps determine who should pay.

Oil sands extraction raises concerns among environmentalists because it generates more of the heat - trapping gases causing climate change than conventional oil drilling, among other things

Understanding these unique areas is important because there are many examples of naturally occurring hybrid zones, and new hybrid zones will form in the future as climate change and human impacts cause species distributions to shift and come into contact.

How long these under - ice explosions of life have been going on is uncertain, he adds, because it is not year clear how closely tied the blooms are to the thinning sea ice and proliferating melt ponds caused by global climate change.

Instead of Australia dumping millions of tonnes of sludge onto their Great Barrier Reef so they can export more coal to be burned (8 February, p 7), why don't they send it to an island country that needs it because of rising sea levels caused by climate change, such as Tuvalu in Polynesia?

Plastics cause problems in ecosystems when they don't break down and animals mistake them for food, and they also affect climate change because of the millions of barrels of oil it takes to manufacture plastic bags and utensils.

But then... to do nothing and watch plants and animals go extinct because of climate change that we caused?

Managed relocation, or assisted migration, for climate change is a controversial topic because of the challenges of moving an endangered species and the potential harm it may cause in a new ecosystem.

Those numbers caused a stir, because they were substantially higher than HFC warming forecasts made by other climate models, including those underpinning the massive reports of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change climate models, including those underpinning the massive reports of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change Climate Change (IPCC).

This research received wide attention, in part because it was illustrated with a simple graphic, the so - called hockey stick curve, that many interpreted as definitive evidence of anthropogenic causes of recent climate change.

,» Soon wrote that because he has assembled evidence supporting the hypothesis that the sun causes climatic change in the Arctic it «invalidates the hypothesis that CO2 is a major cause of observed climate change.»

Human - caused climate change has been occurring over the last 200 yr, largely because of the combustion of fossil fuels and subsequent increase of atmospheric CO2.

Also, although climate change is a concern for conservation biologists, it is not the focus for most researchers (at present), largely I think because of the severity and immediacy of the damage caused by other threats.

Just because poverty or pollution or climate change happen in another country far away, that does not mean that we are not part of the cause of these problems and their necessary solution.

And parents don't know that our district will be the model for all others — because we do it best — we will collect SSP data in the form of social and emotional surveys, we will change our curriculum to socially engineer our children with social and emotional instruction without parents suspecting a thing, we will assess and survey up the wazoo about academics, school climate, cyberbullying, etc. while willing parents stand by, we will enhance our teacher evaluation program and refine it into a well - oiled teacher manipulation machine, and since our kids would do well no matter what because we have uber - involved parents, it will look like everything the Administrators are doing at the State's recommendation causes the success.

NPR has always struck me as fairly balanced in that they always give both sides of the story, no matter how nutty or fucking ridiculous the other side is (like those who still believe abortions cause cancer, climate change isn't real because there's still ice in the oceans, etc).

Bill wrote: «I remain an anthropogenically - caused climate change skeptic because of the extraordinarily high number of unproved variables that must be shown to be true»

But because of the necessary caveats that must be applied due to the state of the science I am starting to feel unable to say much about climate change apart from: «The increase in CO2 will very probably cause an overall increase in Global Average Temperature.

Eric, thanks for the even - handed treatment of this «new» climate data, but I remain an anthropogenically - caused climate change skeptic because of the extraordinarily high number of unproved variables that must be shown to be true, in order for man's puny efforts at controlling the climate to have any long term effect.

I think the larger point around this is the media don't really report this sort of research, or that over 90 % of climate scientists think we are causing climate change, because they would rather keep a manufactured pretend controversy going to attract more readers interest.

There is of course more, but I'm going to stop because I realize that while all this is good evidence for harms caused by anthropogenic climate change in general, to be really relevant to the topic at hand, we should be looking at the specific harms alleged by the plaintiffs in the suit over which judge Alsup is presiding.

``... estimates of future rises remain hazy, mostly because there are many uncertainties, from the lack of data on what ice sheets did in the past to predict how they will react to warming, insufficient long - term satellite data to unpick the effects of natural climate change from that caused by man and a spottiness in the degree to which places such as Antarctica have warmed....

-- Projected precipitation and temperature changes imply changes in floods, although overall there is low confidence at the global scale regarding climate - driven changes in magnitude or frequency of river - related flooding, due to limited evidence and because the causes of regional changes are complex.

«Recent surveys of meteorologists have indicated that their belief or disbelief in human cause trying climate change is really an extension of the broader public misunderstanding, and that's a real problem because meteorologists are among the most trusted messengers of information about climate change.»

During that time he was oblivious to the attacks on Ben Santer being waged by S. Fred Singer, Frederick Seitz, Patrick Michaels, Global Climate Coalition (a group of fossil fuel interests) and others because Santer's (and others) research showed that humans were in fact causing climate to change (IPCC 2nd Assessment,Climate Coalition (a group of fossil fuel interests) and others because Santer's (and others) research showed that humans were in fact causing climate to change (IPCC 2nd Assessment,climate to change (IPCC 2nd Assessment, 1995).

Your and all your other fellow climate alarmists provide evidence that these observations of eminent scientists is correct, because none of you can cite any peer reviewed science that empirically falsifies the null climate hypothesis of natural variability still being the primary cause of climate change, or cite any peer reviewed science that empirically shows that anthropogenic CO2 has been the primary cause of the late 20th century climate warming.

Side Effect of California's Drought: More Climate Pollution 01.03.2017 — Droughts are already getting longer and more severe because of human - caused climate change in the American Southwest and around theClimate Pollution 01.03.2017 — Droughts are already getting longer and more severe because of human - caused climate change in the American Southwest and around theclimate change in the American Southwest and around the world.

«Global warming» is the best term for the current human - caused climate change because it is the main characteristic feature of the change.

# 3 is an even bigger problem because climate skeptics don't want to accept CO2 can dominate natural causes of global temperature change.

There may not be many scientists who doubt the human cause of recent climate change but, because of politics, their influence is exaggerated and the public has been quite deliberately misled about the level of consensus in climate science.

«Many of the uncertainties surrounding the causes of climate change will never be resolved because the necessary data are lacking.

Scientists stopped arguing decades ago because there is multiple lines of evidence pointing to the fact that climate change is real, happening right now and is caused primarily right now by humans.

It is easy to see why this feedback amplifies the climate change, because reduction of ice sheet size due to warming exposes a darker surface, which absorbs more sunlight, thus causing more warming.

Second, cumulative emissions are particularly important, because it is the accumulated stock of GHGs in the atmosphere that cause climate change.

This is not a careful argument, because people — sceptical and not — have been questioning the leaps between observing that the earths temperature changes, the attribution of that change to humans, the conclusion that it will cause catastrophe, and that the only way to confront that catastrophe is by mitigating climate change through reduction in emissions.

If you want a study of scientists that are publicly stating that humans are the primary cause of climate change, then you won't find one, because scientists have better things to do

In fact, it is precisely because «the discussion about the causes of global warming was to a very great extent settled by the date of broadcast», meaning that climate change was no longer a matter of political controversy, that a programme claiming it is all a pack of lies could slip past the partiality rules.

Because the impacts of GHG emissions can be felt beyond a country's border, and the impacts of climate change on countries are highly variable, there is potential for some emitters to contribute more or less to the causes of climate change than is proportionate to their vulnerability to its effects9, 10,11.

It and other oil - producing nations have, among other things, claimed a need for adaptation funding — normally reserved for the poor nations that have done little to cause climate change but are bearing the brunt of weather disasters and other problems — because of rising sea levels that threaten offshore oil rigs.

The fact that so many studies on climate change don't bother to endorse the consensus position is significant because scientists have largely moved from what's causing global warming onto discussing details of the problem (eg - how fast, how soon, impacts, etc).

Johng, you seem to me to be that type of person that desperately needs a cause, and so any half decent cause will do... because climate change is still a reasonably politically correct cause it make a good place to call home.

We believe it does not because those causing climate change have had clear ethical duties to reduce the threat of climate change once they were put on notice that their actions were likely putting others at great risk.

So because the Earth was much warmer many millions of years ago and the Earth's climate has naturally changed due to asteroid impact, volcanic eruptions, changes in the solar flux, the emergence of plants which produced ~ 20 % oxygen content in the air and which in turn allowed animals to evolve, there's just no way that 7 billion humans can cause any problem at all.

They include, among many others, principles on what is each nation's fair share of safe global emissions, who is responsible for reasonable adaptation needs of those people at greatest risk from climate damages in poor nations that have done little to cause climate change, should high - emitting nations help poor nations obtain climate friendly energy technologies, and what responsibilities should high - emitting nations have for refugees who must flee their country because climate change has made their nations uninhabitable?

But the expected acceleration due to climate change is likely hidden in the satellite record because of a happenstance of timing: The record began soon after the Pinatubo eruption, which temporarily cooled the planet, causing sea levels to drop.»

Obama's disingenuous Tweet, whether it be «dangerous», «catastrophic» or «apocalyptic» — and he did use the word dangerous — is disingenuous because there is no such consensus on the dangers of climate change, only that climate is changing and it is likely caused, at least in part, by humans.