Sentences with phrase «consensus on climate change issues»

Claims that there is an international consensus on climate change issues are equally false.

Not exact matches

So when people question the scientific consensus on issues such as climate change, vaccine effectiveness or the safety of genetically modified organisms (SN: 2/6/16, p. 22), it's no...

So when people question the scientific consensus on issues such as climate change, vaccine effectiveness or the safety of genetically modified organisms (SN: 2/6/16, p. 22), it's no surprise that one of the first inclinations of journalists and scientists has been to think, hey, these doubters just don't know the facts.

The study included 1,341 people, data collected by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, and focused on a specific partisan issue on which scientific consensus has been widely adopted by Democrats but challenged by Republicans.

In 2007, when the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) issued its most recent report on the state of the planet's climate, the consensus was that the Arctic would not be ice - free in summer until the end of the cClimate Change (IPCC) issued its most recent report on the state of the planet's climate, the consensus was that the Arctic would not be ice - free in summer until the end of the cclimate, the consensus was that the Arctic would not be ice - free in summer until the end of the century.

Specifically on the issue of global warming from greenhouse gases and climate change, the conference reached a consensus on the likelihood of a rise in the global mean temperature of between 2.7 - 8 degrees F (1.5 - 4.5 degrees C) by about 2050, but not on whether such warming has begun.

Through relentless pressure on the media to present the issue «objectively,» and by challenging the consensus on climate change science by misstating both the nature of what «consensus» means and what this particular consensus is, ExxonMobil and its allies have confused the public and given cover to a few senior elected and appointed government officials whose positions and opinions enable them to damage U.S. credibility abroad.

I didn't yet watch the entire session, but I'm wondering if anyone made a case regarding the lack of any long term worsening trend in climate change related issues (sea level rise, glacier melt, tropical systems, floods, extreme drought, tornadoes, etc) comparing pre 1950 (the consensus view of the birth of any potentially observable human footprint on GW) to post 1950?

Here's a story we all now know well: A small number of groups backed by the fossil fuel industry have for decades shed doubt on the science of climate change, even as the actual scientific community consensus on the issue — that greenhouse gas pollution posed a significant threat to our climate — remained strong and continued to grow stronger.

new: scientific consensus on climate issues does not exist - Novaya Gazeta, December 16, 2009 - Instead of articulating and prosecution of false targets political leaders gathered in Copenhagen should concentrate on the other - to develop policies that promote more effective human adaptation to climate change, economic growth, the development of free trade, protection of property rights, strengthen democracy.

The New York Times reported on August 19 that the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) will soon issue its 5th assessment report that will state that the scientific consensus that humans are causing climate change has increased from a 90 % probability in 2007 to a 95 % probability in the new Climate Change (IPCC) will soon issue its 5th assessment report that will state that the scientific consensus that humans are causing climate change has increased from a 90 % probability in 2007 to a 95 % probability in the new rChange (IPCC) will soon issue its 5th assessment report that will state that the scientific consensus that humans are causing climate change has increased from a 90 % probability in 2007 to a 95 % probability in the new climate change has increased from a 90 % probability in 2007 to a 95 % probability in the new rchange has increased from a 90 % probability in 2007 to a 95 % probability in the new report.

However the platform does not directly mention climate change or global warming, and does not acknowledge the clear scientific consensus on both the degree of human attribution and the urgency of action on the issue of climate change.

Though not obvious, this claim is central to the tenet of the paper, and is an example of the cause - versus - effect issue I repeatedly refer to in the past when discussing some of the most fundamental errors made in the scientific «consensus» on climate change.

«In light of the overwhelming scientific consensus on climate change and its worsening impacts, and the related issue of air pollution from burning fossil fuels, the United States and China recognize the urgent need for action to meet these twin challenges,» the countries said in the statement.

Given a strong commitment to action on the issue and a strong political outlook, advocates like blogger Joe Romm tend to notice and highlight each instance of dismissive media commentary or falsely balanced coverage of climate change while tending to overlook (or go without mentioning) the many other instances of coverage where consensus views on climate change are strongly asserted.

On climate change in particular — as on other contested science issues — both sides think their position is consistent with scientific consensuOn climate change in particular — as on other contested science issues — both sides think their position is consistent with scientific consensuon other contested science issues — both sides think their position is consistent with scientific consensus.

This can also be seen in print and TV news coverage of GOP presidential candidates» climate denial, which frequently failed to indicate that the candidates» statements about climate change conflicted with the scientific consensus on the issue.

All of the above is part of the emerging, solidifying scientific consensus on global warming — a consensus that raises the urgent political and economic issue of climate change.

You acknowledge that there is no consensus on the most important aspects of the issue of potential climate change when you write:

The three lead NIPCC authors — Craig Idso, Robert M. Carter, and S. Fred Singer — reveal how no survey or study shows a «consensus» on the most important scientific issues in the climate change debate, and how most scientists do not support the alarmist claims of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate climate change debate, and how most scientists do not support the alarmist claims of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Cchange debate, and how most scientists do not support the alarmist claims of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Climate ChangeChange.

Effectively communicating the scientific consensus can also help move the issue of climate change forward on the public policy agenda [6][15][20][24 — 25].

In November, 2015, the three lead NIPCC authors — Craig Idso, Robert M. Carter, and S. Fred Singer — wrote a small book titled Why Scientists Disagree About Global Warming: The NIPCC Report on Scientific Consensus revealing how no survey or study shows a «consensus» on the most important scientific issues in the climate change debate, and how most scientists do not support the alarmist claims of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate climate change debate, and how most scientists do not support the alarmist claims of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Cchange debate, and how most scientists do not support the alarmist claims of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Climate ChangeChange.

The US Chamber of Commerce has been a key part of the corporate effort to block federal action on climate change and undermine the scientific consensus on the issue.

In a statement, Mr. Boehlert, who is retiring at the end of the year, expressed satisfaction with the results, saying, «There is nothing in this report that should raise any doubts about the broad scientific consensus on global climate change — which doesn't rest primarily on these temperature issues, in any event — or any doubts about whether any paper on the temperature records was legitimate scientific work.»

The environmentalists linked the issue so that people, including some scientists began to think that the IPCC's focus on man made climate change represented a consensus on the science which was also a consensus on the environmentalist's recommended policy.

I can go back & check, but I'm pretty sure the last time I collected data on this issue (probably 2009 or so), the connection between «scientific consensus» & «belief in climate change was much much stronger.

The visibility of climate impacts is part of the emerging, solidifying scientific consensus on global warming — a consensus that raises the urgent political and economic issue of climate change.

This is an important question, because (as I have shown in previous research) negativity toward scientists is associated with the rejection of scientific consensus on issues like climate change.

There is no consensus on some of the most important issues involved in assessing human - caused climate change, including atmospheric sensitivity, the most important factor.

«There's a better scientific consensus on this [climate change] than on any issue I know — except maybe Newton's second law of dynamics».

Moreover, they determined that Easterbrook had distorted the results of a poll taken of scientists on the issue and mischaracterized the positions of the National Academy of Sciences and the IPCC to downplay the growing consensus regarding climate change.

«To the extent that reporting and commentary have misrepresented scientific consensus on the issue of human contributions to climate change, there is a problem.»

Environmentalists who say we should accept the scientific consensus on climate change while telling us to ignore it on other issues are the people who are playing into the hands of those who oppose action on climate change.