Sentences with phrase «debate over climate science»

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.»

Debate over climate science was «all the rage» in the past, he said.

The Military Advisory Board chose not to engage in debate over climate science but did note that current levels of atmospheric carbon are already at historically high levels and are increasing.

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has confirmed that the debate over climate science is over.

In an appearance last week at Purdue University I was on a panel with Roger Pielke, Jr., of the University of Colorado and Judith Curry of the Georgia Institute of Technology exploring the heated state of the debate over climate science and policy.

They are solid points that hold lessons for advocates on both sides of the charged debate over climate science and its implications for society.

how refreshing to know that there can still be a civil discourse between «advocates on both sides of the charged debate over climate science and its implications for society.»

Then feel free to really become both pessimistic and more stridently motivated to take the debate over Climate Science up several notches immediately.

Democrats, in turn, bemoaned the continued debate over climate science among politicians.

Many people frame debates over climate science with a false dichotomy.

The report also says that most of the benefits of climate mitigation policies in the short term will come in the form of public health co-benefits from reduced air pollution, suggesting that climate advocacy will be well served to move away from debates over climate science and apocalyptic doomsaying, instead focusing on the multiple benefits in the near term of moving toward cleaner energy sources.

Not exact matches

In his speech, Kerry noted that the president «has repeatedly questioned the underlying science of climate change and attempted to reignite the debate over whether the threat is real.»

The Southern Company is not only polluting the environment with carbon and other dangerous emissions — it's also polluting the debate over climate policy by funding bad science.

Heading into the 2015 True / False Film Festival in Columbia, Missouri, the last two documentaries I reviewed were Kirby Dick's The Hunting Ground, about rape on college campuses, and Robert Kenner's Merchants Of Doubt, about the industry - financed «experts» who deliberately muddy the debate over the settled science of climate change and cigarette - smoking.

So, I agree with Al Gore (and most, if not all, climate scientists) that the general debate about AGW is over (tho some keep arguing on and on to the contrary like zombies), even though the scientists are still doing climate science and ironing out «the details.»

I believe that most of the debating over science and climate change ended last year with the release of the 4 IPCC reports.

* 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...)

To be sure a «debate» over whether or not human activity is altering the climate still rages, but it is not a clear - headed objective debate about the science among scientists actually working in the relevant fields, it's a debate about the science and its impact on human society in the court of public opinion.

Second, there is a wider debate over what to do, or not do, about climate change, with peoples» preferences (a carbon tax, a technology push, building dikes or parasols in space) not so much a function of science as values.

The challenge here, of course, is that the fight over climate science, to my mind, is a spillover from the more heated, and deeper, debate over climate policy.

One of the toughest realities attending debates over what to do, or not do, about the growing human influence on the climate system is that more science does not necessarily clarify society's, or individual's, responses.

Despite the often contentious debates that erupt over climate change science, we've seen only one other retraction in the field since we launched in August 2010, when Edward Wegman was forced to retract a paper for plagiarism.

Debate over effective climate change communication must be grounded in rigorous affective science.

Al Gore, the most famous face of the global warming - industrial complex, has been saying for years that the debate is over, that science has declared humans are responsible for climate change.

Specialized reporters have tracked the developments in climate science and the policy debates over the implications of that science.

Iâ $ ™ d still like to see Willis and his fellow AGW recalcitrants start a fresh debate over there so I can see them put those wacky climate scientists in their place and teach them a thing or to about real science, the type that doesnâ $ ™ t impact on business profits.

Top climate scientist James Hansen tells the story of his involvement in the science of and debate over global climate change.

His view accords with that of a growing number of scientists concerned about the pursuit of «intensely political» areas of science, such as the debate over climate change, amid fears that views contrary to government policy were unwelcome.

One of the biggest mistakes that I see in the climate science community is that the meteorologists were relegated to second class citizenship in the climate debate and the physicists took over.

Judith My compliments on your effort to separate the science from the politics, and to get the political debate going over energy & climate.

Thus as far as the science goes, there is little to advance the case of any side in the debate over climate policy.

When outlets such as The New York Times finally weighed in, their stories tended to confuse climate politics (the debate over what to do about GW) and climate science (that debate over what we know about the Earth and our influence upon it).

«Forecast the Facts» is a front group for the individuals responsible for politicizing the science and polarizing the debate over climate change.

In this special Cabot Institute lecture, in association with the Bristol Festival of Ideas, Professor Michael E Mann will discuss the science, politics, and ethical dimensions of global warming in the context of his own ongoing experiences as a figure in the centre of the debate over human - caused climate change.

If the science is settled, he reasons, then the idea that «The contest between climate advocates and their critics is primarily a scientific contest — a debate over who has the best science» is false.

Many of the biggest disconnects in the policy debate occur where climate science crosses over into climate engineering — the rules for engineers are very different, it can't be merely plausible that your bridge won't fall down or your grid won't strand people without power when it's 40 degrees below zero.

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.

Oh, and as to the Bush administration censoring science, I was following the politics of that struggle long before the climate debate exploded over the internet.

According to the Governor of California the debate on climate change is over, the science is irrefutable, and in the absence of federal leadership, his State and others are taking matters into their own hands.

I can't promise that the hockey stick will be as dead as Section 13 by the time this stupid trial is over, but I will do my best to ensure it - not just because the appalling and incurious prostration before pseudo-authority embodied by everyone from «Ellen» to The Columbia Journalism Review ought to be embarrassing to a functioning media, but because climate science itself, like Brandeis and the State of Ohio, needs, in Steve Huntley's phrase, more «free speech, free debate, free minds».

Trump's pick to lead the Environmental Protection Agency, Oklahoma Attorney General Scott Pruitt, is a prominent denier of climate science, writing in the National Review in May that «the debate is far from settled» over whether human activity has contributed to the warming of the earth.

My background is in science and I've followed the issues in several fields over the years (the climate debate is an interest to me, but not the main field I track with).

Individuals and groups associated with climate denial or science obfuscation have recently inserted themselves into the raging public debates over the use of Israel's newly discovered natural gas fields.

Romm's intent as a professional blogger working for an advocacy group appears aimed at making discussion of the Climate Shift report an endless debate over uncertainty and data, all fixed to a supposed personality clash between researchers, a strategy that he often accuses Republicans of doing on climate sClimate Shift report an endless debate over uncertainty and data, all fixed to a supposed personality clash between researchers, a strategy that he often accuses Republicans of doing on climate sclimate science.

Despite the press releases of James Hansen, Gavin Schmidt, Michael Mann and others claiming the debate is over, there are a large number of of scientists who are no less qualified and are more qualified in climate science and the atmospheric sciences who strongly dispute such claims.

As Chris Mooney writes in his post about the discussion between Drs Francis and Trenberth, «The biggest debate in climate science may be over whether global warming will create more winters like this one.

Smith also notes that the repercussions extend beyond the debate over any given pipeline — under Harper, the Canadian government has become a global laggard on basic climate science.

The Climate Change Awards were started as a way to recognize individuals of extraordinary ability and unflagging commitment to restoring sound science and common sense to the debate over global warming.

One is that the public debate over climate change, whether it be over the science or policies, has a very nasty and unsavoury underbelly.

Schneider was influential in the public debate over climate change and wrote a book, Science as a Contact Sport: Inside the Battle to Save Earth's Climate, about his experclimate change and wrote a book, Science as a Contact Sport: Inside the Battle to Save Earth's Climate, about his experClimate, about his experiences.