Sentences with phrase «fundamental science of climate change»

Not exact matches

The exhibit will present in an accessible way the fundamentals of weather and climate, the science behind climate change, and what actions people can take to reduce our own impact.

The Trump administration is outlining policies that put our response to climate change in deep jeopardy and threaten to change the fundamental direction of science in the U.S.

The basic physics of climate change have been known for more than a century, but it is in recent decades that the fundamental science of global warming has solidified

During a 6 - 10 June training program, the 15 AAAS Leshner Leadership Institute fellows also engaged in interactive sessions on the science of science communication, public attitudes about climate change, how Americans consume science news, best practices in leveraging social media, and the fundamentals of engaging policymakers in science - based dialogue.

«Agents doing the dirty bidding of the fossil fuel industry know they can't contest the fundamental science of human - caused climate change,» he said in an email.

«Agents doing the dirty bidding of the fossil fuel industry know they can't contest the fundamental science of human - caused climate change.

Judge William Alsup had requested this tutorial to bring him up to speed on the fundamental science before proceedings begin in earnest in a case brought by the cities of San Francisco and Oakland, on behalf of the people of California, against a group of major fossil fuel companies, addressing the costs of climate change caused, they argue, by products those companies have sold.

According to the latest science, in most cases (outside of extreme heat waves) the connections between today's extreme weather events and human - driven climate change range from weak (hurricanes) to nil (tornadoes)-- and the dominant driver of losses in such events is fast - paced development or settlement in places with fundamental climatic or coastal vulnerability.

• Lack of formal model verification & validation, which is the norm for engineering and regulatory science • Circularity in arguments validating climate models against observations, owing to tuning & prescribed boundary conditions • Concerns about fundamental lack of predictability in a complex nonlinear system characterized by spatio - temporal chaos with changing boundary conditions • Concerns about the epistemology of models of open, complex systems

With respect to the science of climate change, the most fundamental question remains: «Can humans manipulate climate predictably?»

The Science Museum of Minnesota's site explains that climate change is «a fundamental element of scientific literacy and critical thinking.»

Posted 24 January 2009: «Like many of those who were caught off guard by the subprime mortgage crisis, those involved in the rapidly expanding climate change industry are not asking the most fundamental of questions:» • What if the science that supposedly backs concerns over carbon dioxide (CO2)...

«Climate change has taken on political dimensions... That's odd because I don't see people choosing sides over E = mc2 or other fundamental facts of science.»

«agents doing the dirty bidding of the fossil fuel industry know they can't contest the fundamental science of human - caused climate change.

I don't think any set of changes to the climate science policy interface will solve the fundamental problem.

by Robert Ellison (Chief Hydrologist) • The theory and estimation of the role of cloud in changing Earth's dynamic energy balance is an area of fundamental weakness in climate science.

The important considerations with these papers is to examine not only how much attention climate change received across these years but also how the fundamentals of climate science were portrayed, as well as other dimensions.

It calls for a new era of climate change science where an emphasis is placed on «fundamental, use - inspired» research, which not only improves understanding of the causes and consequences of climate change but also is useful to decision makers at the local, regional, national, and international levels acting to limit and adapt to climate change.

However, on closer investigation, the difference in responses is related less to different interpretations of the science underpinning climate change and much more to differing assumptions related to five fundamental and contextual issues.

That the researcher responsible for the study is clearly not a «climate change denier» makes the IPCC's credibility gap all the more significant, and it raises new questions regarding the fundamental credibility of any claim coming from an organization which has relied on shaky science to back its demand for the power to take $ 76 trillion from the economies of the industrialized world and «redistribute» those funds for «green technologies» in the third world.

Thus, John Cook's reasonably even handed and often understated site, skeptical science, which gives example after example after example — based upon the actual science, and vetted science papers — of the multiple fundamental myths that drive the great bulk (if not to some extent, ALL) climate change naysaying, is thus dismissed (and Cook himself — see some of the other anti climate change sites, for instance — repeatedly denigrated).

Steve Koonin proposed to look at the fundamental science aspects of climate change (as per IPCC WG1).

However, I fear that until all these learned societies go back to the fundamental principles of science, like Nullius in Verba, Marcotte and people like him will think that, when it comes to climate change, the right thing to do is forget science, and just present the propaganda that supports The Cause and The Team.

My opinion, which I tell my students, is that knowing the fundamentals, knowing the basics — whatever area you work in, climate economics or ecological sciences — addressing and studying climate change problems requires an interdisciplinary approach and sooner or later that person who is very much well - versed in the fundamentals of his or her own choice of areas will see the avenue directing to the major issue of climate change or climate science.

He describes the person / people who released the latest batch of CRU emails as: «agents doing the dirty bidding of the fossil fuel industry know they can't contest the fundamental science of human - caused climate change.

These characteristics have fundamental implications for all socially contentious science issues; just one example is the likely failure of «climate change education» 37.

* As was recently stated in Nature, «Climate: The real holes in climate science» 463 (7279): 284 (2010): «Such holes do not undermine the fundamental conclusion that humans are warming the climate, which is based on the extreme rate of the twentieth - century temperature changes and the inability of climate models to simulate such warming without including the role of greenhouse - gas pollution.Climate: The real holes in climate science» 463 (7279): 284 (2010): «Such holes do not undermine the fundamental conclusion that humans are warming the climate, which is based on the extreme rate of the twentieth - century temperature changes and the inability of climate models to simulate such warming without including the role of greenhouse - gas pollution.climate science» 463 (7279): 284 (2010): «Such holes do not undermine the fundamental conclusion that humans are warming the climate, which is based on the extreme rate of the twentieth - century temperature changes and the inability of climate models to simulate such warming without including the role of greenhouse - gas pollution.climate, which is based on the extreme rate of the twentieth - century temperature changes and the inability of climate models to simulate such warming without including the role of greenhouse - gas pollution.climate models to simulate such warming without including the role of greenhouse - gas pollution.»

As long as science is willing and ready to serve power, everything is fine and smooth; but if science, as in relation to climate change, beigins to challenge fundamental aspects of how wealth and power and weilded and distributed, and the consequences of our socio / economic system; then science had better watch out, because, those who, for whatever reason, threaten the status quo are the enemy.