Not exact matches
Rep. Ralph Hall, however, prevaricated about the extent of
humans»
influence —
citing great debate and uncertainty among experts.
I would have erred had I not
cited other works by Vosshall and Keller in the concluding sentence of my 2012 review: «
Human pheromones and food odors: epigenetic
influences on the socioaffective nature of evolved behaviors.»
They can
cite the IPCC: «It is extremely likely that
human influence has been the dominant cause of the observed warming since the mid-20th century.»
Kojima
cited Japanese author Kobo Abe (one of his many
influences) and how Abe explored the idea that the very first tool
humans created was a stick to defend themselves while the second tool they made was a rope to secure things they valued.
Let's assume these studies somehow greatly underestimated natural variability in the climate system, so that the «signal» of anthropogenic climate change has not yet emerged from the «noise» of natural variations (i.e., the above -
cited «discernible
human influence» had not been detected after all).
One board member, however, refused to accept the standards as written,
citing his own personal belief that
human influence on climate change was not «a foregone conclusion.»
They can
cite the IPCC: «It is extremely likely that
human influence has been the dominant cause of the observed warming since the mid-20th century.»
For instance: in support of «temperatures and causality» he
cites a paper by Zhang et al on «Detection of
human influence on twentieth century precipitation trends».
Judith Curry
cited the rises and landings in the earlier part of the 20th century in her critique the IPCC's finding that
human influences are responsible for more than half of the warming since 1950.
The «discernible
human influence» supposedly revealed by the IPCC has been
cited thousands of times since in media around the world, and has been the «stopper» in millions of debates among nonscientists.»