Sentences with phrase «change science seriously»

-- regards climate - change science seriously?

Oscar - winning actor Leonardo DiCaprio told reporters in Japan on Wednesday the United States must elect a president who takes climate change science seriously.

Not exact matches

This isn't rocket science — it's just making the changes that are necessary for Albertans to believe that this government is actually taking accountability seriously.»

Do you seriously think for even one millisecond that the religiously driven anti-intellectual climate in America is not largely due to adults telling kids that evolution isn't true, that climate change is just a big liberal conspiracy, or that generally speaking nobody really needs to be good at math or science anymore?

For one thing, Francis has the temerity to take the science of climate change seriously, which is the sort of thing that can send a Wall Street Journal conservative frantically groping for his smelling salts, but which I can not help thinking is slightly saner than clinging to the politically inflected obfuscations of the data that so many in the developed world use to calm their digestions and consciences.

Nevertheless, it takes seriously the developments in critical Bible studies, the new insights gained from the social sciences of cultural anthropology and sociology, the impact of technology and political theory in rapid cultural change and the issues raised by cross-cultural communication on a global scale.

The point I want to make in this brief and incomplete survey is that history shows that religion takes change seriously and modifies its concepts as knowledge grows, though it could learn a lot more of this from ever - changing science.

So one has to take seriously the possibility that any significant change this virus makes... may well come from that quarter, rather than from humans» (Science, 10 July 2009, p. 140).

The full quote:» Three investigations of the alleged scientific misconduct of the Climate Research Unit at the University of East Anglia — one by the UK House of Commons Science and Technology Committee, a second by the Scientific Assessment Panel of the Royal Society, chaired by Lord Oxburgh, and the latest by the Independent Climate Change E-mails Review, chaired by Sir Muir Russell — have confirmed what climate scientists have never seriously doubted: established scientists depend on their credibility and have no motivation in purposely misleading the public and their colleagues.

Even when you talk to somebody like Steven Chu, my energy secretary, who knows the science of climate change and takes it very seriously, as do I, he's the first one to acknowledge that we're going to need some transformative technologies in order for us to get all the way to where we need to be on climate change.

JUDITH Curry has brought a touch of hope to those who are prepared to take climate change seriously but are tired of being told that science has spoken.

4) A statement of what other serious theories regarding recent climate changes are on the table — some have been presented here at Climate Etc. 5) A confession that many have been doing lots of science seriously compromised by confirmation bias, due to funding pressures.

For his part, Holdren has served for the past eight years as the science advisor to President Obama, a position from which he laments that Americans don't take his warnings on climate change seriously.

Check out the Evangelical Climate Initiative (ECI), which accepts climate science, takes the threat of climate change seriously, and calls on evangelical Christians to address the issue.

ABC Science: Is an extreme heatwave enough for people to start taking the science of climate change seriously in AusScience: Is an extreme heatwave enough for people to start taking the science of climate change seriously in Ausscience of climate change seriously in Australia?

These were: the Catastrophic Anthropogenic Global Warming (CAGW) hypothesis is invalid from a scientific viewpoint because it fails a number of critical comparisons with available observable data, the draft TSD was seriously dated and the updates made to an abortive 2007 version of the draft TSD used to prepare it were inadequate, and EPA should conduct an independent analysis of the science of global warming rather than adopting the conclusions of outside groups such as the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and U.S. Government reports based on IPCC's reports.

For me, being engineering trained in chemistry and physics and quantitative methods and with 40 years working on the science of Climate Change (both cooling and warming), including nearly 30 as a Board Member of the NOAA Program in Climate Change and 14 with IPCC leadership roles, I seriously doubt there is enough CO2 or any other trace gas to really matter significantly.

I can not seriously believe that rational people can not understand how the greenhouse effect works any basic science readings will fix that issue up and you can avoid the whole climate change science go to a hard physics site.

as an unwashed mass, I can't help but comment about John Cook «this course examines science of climate change denial» oh great, a new junk science I can't believe anyone takes this seriously SkS puts up a post and 2 people comment CE gets 300 comments before noon (most of them readable and informative)

Soon after the 2007 release of the IPCC's Fourth Assessment Report, those familiar with the science began to say that as a result of the consensus process and the natural caution of scientists, the Fourth Assessment Report had seriously understated the risks from climate change, particularly in its selection of scenarios and its estimates of likely sea - level rise.16

Please let me (very seriously and sincerely) that in regard to climate - change science, Judith Curry's sustained commitment to open public discourse is among valuable contributions of any scientist, and that (as it seems to me) the name «Curry» amply deserves to be on the short list of prize committees around the world.

«If Margaret Thatcher took climate change seriously and believed that we should take action to reduce global greenhouse emissions, then taking action and supporting and accepting the science can hardly be the mark of incipient Bolshevism.»

Max is free to present his views on science, but I don't think that makes it right to present a supposed quote of what another has written changing the wording so much that the message is seriously distorted.

Nature Editorial (Nature Climate Change doi: 10.1038 / nclimate2193): Even if some sceptics consider climate science akin to witchcraft and politicians pursue ineffective policies, private enterprise is beginning to take climate change seriChange doi: 10.1038 / nclimate2193): Even if some sceptics consider climate science akin to witchcraft and politicians pursue ineffective policies, private enterprise is beginning to take climate change serichange seriously.

If the scientific argument about the link between anthropogenic CO2 and climate change is only as good as Lewandowsky's claim that «Rejection of climate science [is] strongly associated with endorsement of a laissez - faire view of unregulated free markets», then perhaps climate sceptics should be taken more seriously.

I know it's tempting to take a potshot at such a sitting duck, but let's keep the focus where it belongs — on the piles of science that say that we are not on a good track today, and we should seriously attempt to change direction.

Sorry, I just don't believe you really take climate change seriously; certainly not enough to condemn those who, without any serious science based cause, promote doubt, denial and delay — and worse, deliberately distort and defame to promote that cause.