Sentences with phrase «for human influence on climate change»

The Third Assessment Report (TAR, 2001) concluded that temperature increases over the twenty - first century could be significantly larger than previously thought, and that the evidence for human influence on climate change was stronger than ever.

Hundreds of private e-mails and documents hacked from a computer server at a British university are causing a stir among global warming skeptics, who say they show that climate scientists conspired to overstate the case for a human influence on climate change.

Not exact matches

The potential consequences of climate change are great and the policies of the next few decades will determine human influences on the climate for centuries.»

«This quantitative attribution of human and natural climate influences on the IPWP expansion increases our confidence in the understanding of the causes of past changes as well as for projections of future changes under further greenhouse warming,» commented Seung - Ki Min, a professor with POSTECH's School of Environmental Science and Engineering.

His research focuses on how human and natural influences on climate contribute to observed climate change and risks of extreme weather and in quantifying their implications for long - range climate forecasts.

Over the weekend, I posted and alerted senior members of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change when an errant description of the panel's 2007 conclusion on the human climate influence found its way into an important draft document listing «elements of an outcome» for long - term action on climate — essentially a draft of what may emerge here when negotiations end on Climate Change when an errant description of the panel's 2007 conclusion on the human climate influence found its way into an important draft document listing «elements of an outcome» for long - term action on climate — essentially a draft of what may emerge here when negotiations end on climate influence found its way into an important draft document listing «elements of an outcome» for long - term action on climate — essentially a draft of what may emerge here when negotiations end on climate — essentially a draft of what may emerge here when negotiations end on Friday.

* 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...)

I've been criticized by some environmentalists in recent years for writing that the long - term picture (more CO2 = warmer world = less ice = higher seas and lots of climatic and ecological changes) is the only aspect of human - caused global warming that is solidly established, and that efforts to link dramatic weather - related events to the human influence on climate could backfire should nature wiggle the other way for awhile.

It will be particularly interesting to see whether Republican presidential candidate John McCain's greener stance on the issue, including his support for policies to limit human - induced climate change, influences rank - and - file Republicans over the coming months.

On the question of hurricanes, the theoretical arguments that more energy and water vapor in the atmosphere should lead to stronger storms are really sound (after all, storm intensity increases going from pole toward equator), but determining precisely how human influences (so including GHGs [greenhouse gases] and aerosols, and land cover change) should be changing hurricanes in a system where there are natural external (solar and volcanoes) and internal (e.g., ENSO, NAO [El Nino - Southern Oscillation, North Atlantic Oscillation]-RRB- influences is quite problematic — our climate models are just not good enough yet to carry out the types of sensitivity tests that have been done using limited area hurricane models run for relatively short times.

We're not offering a «counter-claim» about the science, because our position is that even the concrete, incontrovertible, unassailable fact of human influence on global warming and climate change does not, by itself, make a case for action.

«But more than 15 sections in Chapter 8 of the report — the key chapter setting out the scientific evidence for and against a human influence over the climate — were changed or deleted after the scientist charged with examining this question had accepted the supposedly final text...» — Dr. Frederick Seitz commenting on the IPCC Second Assessment Report, The Wall Street Journal, June 12, 1996

The potential consequences of climate change are great and the actions taken over the next few decades will determine human influences on the climate for centuries.

The Identification of a Human Influence on Climate Change» purports to deal with the evidence for AGW which we are discussing.

He said it was «ludicrous» for Morano to suggest he had been influenced by the grants, especially because his work on climate change and his advocacy for cuts to human emissions pre-dated both the awards.

«It's not known for sure whether (a) climate change is actually occurring or (b) if it is, whether humans really have any influence on it.»

We have a small, tightly knit and perhaps even insular community that everybody is relying on for accurate information on how the Earth's climate is changing over time, and what influence human activity is having on it, yet there appears to be little of self - auditing activity in that field, but rather, if anything, more of a wagon - circling going on...

The UN's official panel on climate change has hit back at sceptics» claims that the case for human influence on global warming has been exaggerated.

Benjamin D. Santer, a climate scientist at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory whose work for the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change was challenged by the Global Climate Coalition and allied groups, said the coalition was «engaging in a full - court press at the time, trying to cast doubt on the bottom - line conclusion of the I.P.C.C.» That panel concluded in 1995 that «the balance of evidence suggests a discernible human influence on global climate.climate scientist at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory whose work for the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change was challenged by the Global Climate Coalition and allied groups, said the coalition was «engaging in a full - court press at the time, trying to cast doubt on the bottom - line conclusion of the I.P.C.C.» That panel concluded in 1995 that «the balance of evidence suggests a discernible human influence on global climate.Climate Change was challenged by the Global Climate Coalition and allied groups, said the coalition was «engaging in a full - court press at the time, trying to cast doubt on the bottom - line conclusion of the I.P.C.C.» That panel concluded in 1995 that «the balance of evidence suggests a discernible human influence on global climate.Climate Coalition and allied groups, said the coalition was «engaging in a full - court press at the time, trying to cast doubt on the bottom - line conclusion of the I.P.C.C.» That panel concluded in 1995 that «the balance of evidence suggests a discernible human influence on global climate.climate.»

From the IPCC AR4: «The fact that climate models are only able to reproduce observed global mean temperature changes over the 20th century when they include anthropogenic forcings, and that they fail to do so when they exclude anthropogenic forcings, is evidence for the influence of humans on global climate.»

One quote in the paper caught my attention: «Striving for balance in reporting, US journalists have given equal prominence to voices confirming or denying the human influence on the climate, thus putting dis - proportionate emphasis on doubt about anthropogenic climate change ``.