Sentences with phrase «for scientific certainty»

Notwithstanding the 2016 Supreme Court ruling (2016 SCC 25), demand for scientific certainty sets a high bar in cases of occupational cancer, the number one cause of workplace death, and other work - related disease — particularly «when only one per cent of the 100,000 chemicals used in the workplace have been thoroughly tested for health risks.»

Decision - makers should not wait for scientific certainty of harm before taking preventive action.

Not exact matches

In such a case, if it exists, the scientist would, of course, be compelled to withdraw his assent to the legitimate teaching authority of the Church, if it were supposed that he really considered the certainty of the scientific «result» as definitively truer and surer than the grounds which he had previously believed he possessed in justification for the claim of the Church to teach.

Traditional and comfortable certainties about God, man, and the universe have been threatened or destroyed for many by the impact of two world wars and the scientific revolutions wrought by Copernicus, Darwin, and Freud.

Over the past 20 years, evidence that humans are affecting the climate has accumulated inexorably, and with it has come ever greater certainty across the scientific community in the reality of recent climate change and the potential for much greater change in the future.

As the editors write in this month's Scientific American, the ruling failed to define what «unreasonable» discrimination of Internet content is, leaving too much up for debate — «the only certainty it gives is of the tens of thousands of billable hours to be spent arguing over the meaning of «unreasonable» in federal court.»

On 28 October, she told the Boston Chamber of Commerce that Congress needs «to double our investment in scientific and biomedical research and create more year - to - year certainty for that funding.»

«Fingerprints lack scientific basis for legal certainty: More research into validity of fingerprint comparisons needed.»

Within the first paragraph of their review, they state that «women have the right to feel sexual pleasure, and for this reason sexual medicine experts and sexologists must spread certainties on the biological basis to all women, not hypotheses or personal opinions, and they must use scientific sexual terminology.»

For example, the NCFS found language such as «reasonable scientific certainty» to be meaningless and recommended that it not be used in court because it gives the false impression of scientific rigor.

The political divide comes with the question of how much additional peer review — and how much scientific certainty — is needed before IRIS assessments are ready for use in making regulations.

Therefore, waiting for more scientific certainty before acting is a mistake, Roe says.

Thus waiting for higher levels of scientific certainty could mean that some tipping points will be crossed before they are recognized.

Thus waiting for higher levels of scientific certainty could mean that some tipping points will be crossed before they are recognized.

The principle calls for action despite a lack of scientific certainty (and by now we've got a healthy level of certainty).

If Dr Curry's scientific position is «there is a considerable amount of uncertainty, therefore we should at least be able to draw some boundaries around them before pushing for a consensus on certainty» (I hope my paraphrase is close to the mark), then advocating for a change in the process of conducting climate science follows logically.

Exxon tried to block the resolution by telling the Securities and Exchange Commission that the supporting statement for the resolution was false and misleading because «it implies a scientific certainty on climate change which, in fact, does not exist.»

Even if, for argument's sake, there were to emerge a broad consensus that the impacts of SRM could be accurately predicted (which seems highly unlikely and endlessly contestable), the social and political impacts of such an intervention are essentially un-knowable, meaning that whatever level of physical scientific certainty or engineering know - how we might gain in this area, the whole enterprise will remain radically unpredictable and risky.

The statement from the original was «lack of full scientific certainty shall not be used as a reason for postponing cost - effective measures».

Where there are threats of serious or irreversible damage, lack of full scientific certainty shall not be used as a reason for postponing cost - effective measures to prevent environmental degradation.â $?

If the critical threshold for climate catastrophe could be identified with scientific certainty, their research suggests that countries very likely would propose a collective target certain to avoid catastrophe, would pledge to contribute their fair share to the global effort, and would act so as to fulfill their promises.

For a long time, GOP pollster Frank Luntz was mainly known as the guy who wrote a 2002 memo advising the Bush administration to «make the lack of scientific certainty a primary issue in the debate [about global warming].»

So long as policy makers can invoke the United Nations Rio Declaration, Principle 15, 1992 (Precautionary Principle: Where there are threats of serious or irreversible damage, lack of full scientific certainty shall not be used as a reason for postponing cost - effective measures to prevent environmental degradation.)

Equally disturbing and unconscionable is the silence of scientists involved in the IPCC who know the vast difference between the scientific limitations and uncertainties and the certainties produced in the Summary for Policymakers (SPM).

Waiting for an arbitrary standard of scientific certainty before changing any behavior is an option the world has, one option among many: the «continue as before» option.

Stresses the importance of the precautionary approach according to which lack of full scientific certainty should not be used for postponing cost - effective measures to prevent environmental degradation, where there are threats of serious or irreversible damage; 2.

It is a scientific fact that Global Warming provides the means for the ignorant to declare with absolute certainty that they know the unknowable — Laika The Space Dog

The Paris agreement to cut anthropogenic CO2 emissions is based on a precautinary principle declarated in the Rio conference: «Rio Declaration on Environment and Development, The United Nations Conference on Environment and Development, Having met at Rio de Janeiro from 3 to 14 June 1992, Princible 15, http://www.unep.org/Documents.Multilingual//Default.asp?documentid=78&articleid=1163» — Where there are threats of serious or irreversible damage, lack of full scientific certainty shall not be used as a reason for postponing cost - effective measures to prevent environmental degradation.

Where there are threats of serious or irreversible damage, lack of full scientific certainty shall not be used as reason for postponing cost - effective measures to prevent environmental degradation.»

Although there are legitimate questions about which scientific assertions are entitled to higher levels of support, lack of certainty is not a legitimate criterion for ignoring scientific concerns as a matter or ethics.

Concerning the uncertainty of assessments made by IPCC, already in The Environment Conference Rio de Janeiro 1992 there was agreed a principle according to which» lack of full scientific certainty shall not be used as a reason for postponing cost - effective measures to prevent environmental degradation».

This strategy appears to have been conceived without any concern for what the truth actually is in regard to scientific certainty.

But note the contradiction the UN PP has Where there are threats of serious or irreversible damage, lack of full scientific certainty shall not be used as a reason for postponing cost - effective measures to prevent environmental degradation.»

Thus the 1992 Rio Declaration, setting out principles for sustainable development, states, «Where there are threats of serious or irreversible damage, lack of full scientific certainty shall not be used as a reason for postponing cost - effective measures to prevent environmental degradation.»

For years it has acted as cheerleader for the AGW lobby but has now been forced to backtrack after complaints from 43 of its members that it has been exaggerating the scientific certainty about the existence of ManBearPFor years it has acted as cheerleader for the AGW lobby but has now been forced to backtrack after complaints from 43 of its members that it has been exaggerating the scientific certainty about the existence of ManBearPfor the AGW lobby but has now been forced to backtrack after complaints from 43 of its members that it has been exaggerating the scientific certainty about the existence of ManBearPig.

What I love most about «skeptics» is that they say that they don't doubt that ACO2 might warm the climate — they only have questions about the certainty related to the magnitude of the effect, but then they turn around and offer an argument like AK's that effectively argue that there is no scientific basis for reducing the uncertainties related to the magnitude of the effect.

Scientific certainty is just another thing for two people to «debate» on television.

Where there are threats of serious or irreversible damage, lack of full scientific certainty should not be used as a reason for postponing such measures, taking into account that policies and measures to deal with climate change should be cost - effective so as to ensure global benefits at the lowest possible cost (UN 1992a: Art 3, emphasis added).

In the meantime, during the debates about US domestic policy on climate change that have been taking place for almost thirty years, the US media has reported on climate issues almost exclusively by focusing on issues of scientific certainty about climate change impacts and economic cost to the US economy.

Given the acknowledged uncertainties and limitations expressed in the title, it is hard to believe that the graph showcased in the paper would later become the poster child of certainty for a scientific consensus on global warming — but it would become just that.

But the memo also criticises environmental campaigners for misrepresenting scientific evidence and says that green groups and the British media «have been guilty of expressing unjustified certainty about the science of climate change».

The overarching justification for most climate change policies today derives from a political interpretation of Principle 15 (now called the Precautionary Principle) of the United Nations Rio Declaration of 1992, which states: «Where there are threats of serious or irreversible damage, lack of full scientific certainty shall not be used as a reason for postponing cost - effective measures to prevent environmental degradation.»

Adapting core principles of risk assessment to climate: To date, the approach of climate change assessments has primarily been rooted in communicating relative scientific certainty and uncertainty around anticipated changes in the physical climate system, along with some basic biophysical impacts that would seem to be generally implied by those climate changes: based, for example, on general understanding of associations such as those between impacts and weather extremes.

The fact is that the HS didn't do much for environmentalism anyway — environmental politics remained the sport of the establishment, because it failed to find popular support; and scientific certainty was not needed for the creation of political institutions prior to the HS.

'' this WGI Technical Summary and the WGI Summary for Policymakers rely on two metrics for communicating the degree of certainty in key findings, which is based on author teams» evaluations of underlying scientific understanding:»

could better be stated «Such variability has important implications for the assertions of levels of certainty unsupported by the current level of scientific knowledge regarding climate change.

But on the other, she claims that scientific certainty is not a necessary requirement for action on climate change, and that no such thing exists.

(For the IPCC's extensive explanation of its official terminology for expressing degrees scientific certainty, see herFor the IPCC's extensive explanation of its official terminology for expressing degrees scientific certainty, see herfor expressing degrees scientific certainty, see here.)

The theme of the conference, «Restoring the Scientific Method,» acknowledges the fact that claims of scientific certainty and predictions of climate catastrophes are based on «post-normal science,» which substitutes claims of consensus for the scientifScientific Method,» acknowledges the fact that claims of scientific certainty and predictions of climate catastrophes are based on «post-normal science,» which substitutes claims of consensus for the scientifscientific certainty and predictions of climate catastrophes are based on «post-normal science,» which substitutes claims of consensus for the scientificscientific method.

Where there are threats of serious or irreversible damage, lack of full scientific certainty shall not be used as a reason for postponing cost - effective measures to prevent environmental degradation.»