Sentences with phrase «debate on climate research»

As to education being a requirement: well, you should just look at the current debate on climate research to see how unreliable of a proxy education is.

Not exact matches

In a video posted on his official Assembly website, Hanna is seen debating a bill on the floor and decrying a «conspiracy» by scientists who engage in climate research to «suppress» research conducted by those who challenge the existence of global warming.

Pielke has been something of a lightning rod in climate debates, sometimes drawing attacks from all sides as a result of his views on research and policy.

During last summer's funding debate, appropriators in turn rejected the breadth of these proposed cuts, though the House and Senate still disagreed on certain areas including climate research.

This scientific research informs debates on issues including climate change, ocean acidification and plastics in the sea.

The potential influence of rapid Arctic warming on such extremes has been a hot research topic in recent years, though it is much debated in the climate community.

Mike Wallace's talk was about the «National Research Council Report on the «Hockey Stick Controversy»... The charge to the committee, was «to summarize current information on the temperature records for the past millennium, describe the main areas of uncertainty and how significant they are, describe the principal methodologies used and any problems with these approaches, and explain how central is the debate over the paleoclimate record within the overall state of knowledge on global climate change.»

Unfortunately the debate about initiating such research is probably minor compared to the debate that would ensue if and when serious discussion began on deploying climate - cooling measures.

* The role of the US in global efforts to address pollutants that are broadly dispersed across national borders, such as greenhouse gasses, persistent organic pollutants, ozone, etc...; * How they view a president's ability to influence national science policy in a way that will persist beyond their term (s), as would be necessary for example to address global climate change or enhancement of science education nationwide; * Their perspective on the relative roles that scientific knowledge, ethics, economics, and faith should play in resolving debates over embryonic stem cell research, evolution education, human population growth, etc... * What specific steps they would take to prevent the introduction of political or economic bias in the dissemination and use of scientific knowledge; * (and many more...)

With respect to Mr. Best's post, which I may be unfairly implying is a good example, one of the fallacious but clever debate manipulations utilized by CC deniers and (way too many) lukewarmers is to focus relentlessly (often inaccurately) on climatological research frontiers such as climate sensitivity, or relations between evaporation, cloudiness, and global albedo.

«On Monday, the judge said he had received two «friend of the court» briefs and told the two groups of contrarians to each file a statement by the close of business on Tuesday declaring who paid for their research, whether they received support from anyone «on either side of the climate debate,» and whether any of them were «affiliated in any way (directly or indirectly)» with parties to the litigatioOn Monday, the judge said he had received two «friend of the court» briefs and told the two groups of contrarians to each file a statement by the close of business on Tuesday declaring who paid for their research, whether they received support from anyone «on either side of the climate debate,» and whether any of them were «affiliated in any way (directly or indirectly)» with parties to the litigatioon Tuesday declaring who paid for their research, whether they received support from anyone «on either side of the climate debate,» and whether any of them were «affiliated in any way (directly or indirectly)» with parties to the litigatioon either side of the climate debate,» and whether any of them were «affiliated in any way (directly or indirectly)» with parties to the litigation.

«Researching Don't Even Think About It, which I see as the most important book published on climate change in the past few years, George Marshall discovered that there has not been a single proposal, debate or even position paper on limiting fossil fuel production put forward during international climate negotiations.

http://humbabe.arc.nasa.gov/~fenton/ Note that this global warming as been studied by only one research team and presented in one article (to be compared to the thousands of articles studying climate trends on earth), based on partial satellite data, and there is a serious debate now amongst the planetologists community to determine if this is a persistent trend or if it will stop in a few years.

The indirect impacts of climate change on people and ecosystems have long been the main focus of research and debate over rising levels of carbon dioxide.

WASHINGTON, D.C. — In an effort to call attention to the detrimental effects of industry - funded, so - called «research» in the debate on global climate change, Senators John (Jay) Rockefeller IV (D - WV) and Olympia Snowe (R - ME) today called on the world's largest oil company to end its funding of a climate change denial campaign.

«ExxonMobil — which recorded $ 10.5 billion in third quarter profits this year — has an obligation and a responsibility to the global community to refrain from lending their support, financial and otherwise, to bogus, non substantiated articles and publications on climate change that serve only to cloud the important global debate of rigorous peer - reviewed research and writings,» Senator Snowe said.

Sen. Jim Inhofe, the Oklahoma Republican who believes that human influence on climate change must be a myth because the Bible says so, said in an interview with Family Research Council President Tony Perkins last night on «Washington Watch» that climate change denialists like himself have won the debate.

It supports research and scholarly debate on the causes and effects of climate change.

Yet FoS states that Barry Cooper's research fund is «directed towards debate of climate science» and to «encourage debate on basic climate science.»

Apco Worldwide was engaged by the U of C to provide strategic communications services relating to the U of C's project «Research on Climate Change Debate».

Latimer, I'm not sure why you assume my responding to you means I am duty - bound to engage you in debate on the entire corpus of climate research.

Generally, I think the debate on climate change research funding on this blog is not very thoughtful.

Drawing on case studies of past environmental debates such as those over acid rain and ozone depletion, science policy experts Roger Pielke Jr. and Daniel Sarewitz argue that once next generation technologies are available that make meaningful action on climate change lower - cost, then much of the argument politically over scientific uncertainty is likely to diminish.26 Similarly, research by Yale University's Dan Kahan and colleagues suggest that building political consensus on climate change will depend heavily on advocates for action calling attention to a diverse mix of options, with some actions such as tax incentives for nuclear energy, government support for clean energy research, or actions to protect cities and communities against climate risks, more likely to gain support from both Democrats and Republicans.

You address your question to ``... those on the co2 AGW side of the debate», and this confuses me because the IOP is clearly not addressing the science behind climate change in their submission, but rather the behavior of scientists and research institutions.

His research focuses on the uses and limits of scenario and gaming methods, as well as of analogies in previous debates on emerging technologies, to explore potential future contingencies in climate engineering.

The arguments raised against such a concern by advocates for geoengineering research often include ones from three groups: first, largely semantic objections to the term «moral hazard»; second, arguments that taking on more climate risk would be the rational response; and third, claims that experience with the adaptation debate somehow disproves the effect.

Capping 23 years of intense research, debate and negotiation, the Paris summit of the UN Framework on Climate Change Convention asserts that a good INDC should be «ambitious, leading to transformation in carbon - intensive sectors and industry; transparent, so that stakeholders can track progress and ensure countries meet their stated goals; and equitable, so that each country does its fair share to address climate change.Climate Change Convention asserts that a good INDC should be «ambitious, leading to transformation in carbon - intensive sectors and industry; transparent, so that stakeholders can track progress and ensure countries meet their stated goals; and equitable, so that each country does its fair share to address climate change.climate change.»

That may be the policy urged by many scientists, particularly the most vocal ones in the climate - change debate, but it's not a consensus based on climate research.

One of the biggest debates in the climate change research community in recent years has been the projected impact of global warming on hurricanes.

While the United States continues the ridiculous debate on the science of climate change (see «Climategate» scandal, which is a result of hacked e-mails from a British research institute, but seems to be getting most play in the United States; but see also this excellent response by the U.S. scientific community organized by a colleague), little such doubt lingers in China, a country governed by technocrats with degrees in engineering and science.

There's an intense scientific debate going on here, and new research conducted since 2007 has given indications that the hurricane picture under climate change may be more complicated than previously supposed.

Reblogged this on Climate Collections and commented: Executive Summary: This paper illuminates a bias introduced in the public debate on climate change, and I [JC] suspect that this bias feeds back into biasing the actual scientific research of many of those scientists most active in interacting with theClimate Collections and commented: Executive Summary: This paper illuminates a bias introduced in the public debate on climate change, and I [JC] suspect that this bias feeds back into biasing the actual scientific research of many of those scientists most active in interacting with theclimate change, and I [JC] suspect that this bias feeds back into biasing the actual scientific research of many of those scientists most active in interacting with the media.

This paper illuminates a bias introduced in the public debate on climate change, and I suspect that this bias feeds back into biasing the actual scientific research of many of those scientists most active in interacting with the media.

The hearing's goal was to discuss the «debate over climate science, the impact of federal funding on the objectivity of climate research, and the ways in which political pressure can suppress opposing viewpoints in the field of climate science.»

Rippey, the USDA meteorologist, did not choose to attribute this year's drought to the long - term climate change that scientists blame in part on human activity — the link between specific extreme weather events and climate change remains the subject of research and debate — but he did say it's shaping up as the worst drought since at least 1988.

Talisman Energy, an Alberta - based energy company, donated $ 175,000 toward the project, which is titled «Research on the Climate - Change Debate.»