The political
discourse over climate change will continue for decades, and so scientists should be prepared for the long haul.
And through those experiences, and through my efforts to try to push back against the misinformation and disinformation and to try to inform
the discourse over climate change, I've become convinced that we play a critical role.
«Thoughts on the Public
Discourse over Climate Change,» Merion West, April 25, 2017.
Is it a useful, responsible part of
the discourse over climate or is it propaganda, plain and simple — as many leaders of the scientific community assert?
Much of
the discourse over climate has been focused on gigatons of gases, megawatt hours of electricity, miles per gallon or details of diplomatic accords or legislation.
Not exact matches
Over the past two decades, in fact, the PRC has played an increasingly pivotal role in shaping the
climate change regime, on the one hand by influencing the global negotiating strategy and
discourse, and, on the other, by building large coalitions in support of its views.
Yaun sees a kind of division in the
discourse over issues like
climate change that is far more profound than party affiliation, yet perhaps is more bridgeable once identified:
[UPDATE, 7:30 pm: John Broder and James Kanter have filed a story examining the growing tensions between the Obama administration and Europe
over what approach, targets and negotiating venue will dominate international
climate discourse.]
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.»
To my mind, some of the intensity in the
discourse over this broad suite of possible
climate interventions — on top of the unintended one under way now — derives from the uncomfortable situation the human species finds itself facing at this moment in its history.
-- Obama has also failed to challenge fossilized foes of meaningful action on energy and
climate change, from Senator James Inhofe to the many conservative columnists — along with some liberals — who've distorted the American
discourse on
climate into an either - or debate
over beliefs little different than that on abortion or gun rights.
4:15 p.m. Updated On the tiny patch of American public
discourse reserved for the global warming debate (to get an idea of how tiny, find
climate, or the environment for that matter, in this news map if you can), a week of blogitation
over a sprawling report examining failed efforts to pass a
climate bill has started to give way to constructive discussion.
I mean even though I became this reluctant and accidental public figure in the debate
over climate change,
over time I've learned to embrace the opportunity that has given me to talk to the public about this problem and the threat that it represents, to inform the public
discourse on this issue.
China and the European Union have used the Trump moves on
climate and energy to assume, at least rhetorically, a leadership role in the public
discourse over limiting global warming.
Good on «yah James Hansen (and colleagues), for scrupulously polite,science - respecting, carefully reasoned, predictively accurate, well - documented, open - to - the - public
climate -
discourse... sustained by personal commitment
over many decades!
The speculative nature of the Hansen
discourse lends no more validity to the current brouhaha
over climate change than any other antics he has performed before or after he retired.
The fact that accomplished
climate scientists have provided you a forum where you could learn and discuss a science, a forum monitored well beyond normal working hours, where even your unwarranted aspersions and useless drivel are allowed as civil
discourse should be viewed as meaning people are bending
over backwards to enlighten you.