Industry leaders knew about the risks of global warming as early as the 1970s, but recognized that
dealing with global warming meant using fewer fossil fuels.
Not exact matches
Once such an IPCC exposition of the assumptions, complications and uncertainties of climate models was constructed and made public, it would immediately have to lead, in my view, to more questions from the informed public such as what does calculating a
mean global temperature change
mean to individuals who have to
deal with local conditions and not a
global average and what are the assumptions, complications and uncertainties that the models contain when it comes to determining the detrimental and beneficial effects of a «
global»
warming in localized areas of the globe.
If we are
dealing with a new normal this could well
mean that
global warming is over.
The whole idea of
dealing with global mean temperatures and averaged - out energy budgets is by itself crude, and one commenter at least has noted that when an observed
global warming of the order of 1C is small compared to the coarseness and sensitivity of such back of an envelope calculations, we need to look elsewhere to resolve disputes.
President Obama is going to need advisors who can find reasonable, pragmatic approaches to
deal with global warming, one of several high priorities for his administration (and by no
means the highest).
At the 2005 UN Climate Change Conference in Montreal, Greenpeace's Steven Guilbeault stated: «
Global warming can
mean colder, it can
mean drier, it can
mean wetter, that's what we're
dealing with.»
Gregory Willits, an avowed
global warming worrier, recently wrote in a December Orlando Sentinel piece that «We are not capable of addressing climate change» (
meaning we can't stop it), so «Let's accept climate change and
deal with it in a big way.»