Sentences with phrase «future global warming do»

[Further Response: Our estimates of the magnitude of future global warming do not come from ice core data, and do not depend on it in any way.

[Further Response: Our estimates of the magnitude of future global warming do not come from ice core data, and do not depend on it in any way.

Not exact matches

If a Republican candidate would say, — yes even if a messiah is coming, people had been saying that for 2000 years, therefore, we are all obliged to preserve the planet for future generations and human activities do excessively cause global warming.

Also, if we think of our economic wellbeing as having to do with the future as well as the present, then we must consider how present activities contribute to a global warming that will be extremely costly to us and to our descendants.

Global warming due to mankind's greenhouse - gas emissions from burning fossil fuels already affects the Indian monsoon and — if unabated — is expected to do even more so in the future.

«The result is not a surprise, but if you look at the global climate models that have been used to analyze what the planet looked like 20,000 years ago — the same models used to predict global warming in the future — they are doing, on average, a very good job reproducing how cold it was in Antarctica,» said first author Kurt Cuffey, a glaciologist at the University of California, Berkeley, and professor of geography and of earth and planetary sciences.

The calculations are in line with estimates from most climate models, proving that these models do a good job of estimating past climatic conditions and, very likely, future conditions in an era of climate change and global warming.

Breaking the gridlock on global warming, which will make it easier for these countries to do even more in the future, will require less intrusive approaches, such as flexible commitments and peer review.

Explaining to Australian's that the recent flooding is due to «Global Warming» just reminds them they were told by Global Warming Advocates that the future held only drought, drought and more drought and if they didn't act to stop global warming they would all die of thirst or someGlobal Warming» just reminds them they were told by Global Warming Advocates that the future held only drought, drought and more drought and if they didn't act to stop global warming they would all die of thirst or somWarming» just reminds them they were told by Global Warming Advocates that the future held only drought, drought and more drought and if they didn't act to stop global warming they would all die of thirst or someGlobal Warming Advocates that the future held only drought, drought and more drought and if they didn't act to stop global warming they would all die of thirst or somWarming Advocates that the future held only drought, drought and more drought and if they didn't act to stop global warming they would all die of thirst or someglobal warming they would all die of thirst or somwarming they would all die of thirst or something.

Looking into the future, we found that, if nothing is done to slow climate change, by the time global warming reaches 2 ºC events like this winter would become common at the North Pole, happening every few years.

We know that our young people experience anxiety not only about doing well at school but also about an uncertain future in regard to employment and big world problems such as global warming.

As a far - flung member of the global climate change blogging community, focusing specifically on the possible need for sustainable «polar cities» in the far distant future to house potential survivors of catastrophic global warming events, in say the year 2500 or so (okay, so I am being generous; I don't want to be accussed of fear - mongering in the present).

From the standpoint of doing something about global warming, the uncertainties are irrelevant unless we don't care what kind of world we leave for future generations - of humans and polar bears.

Nobody can predict the future exactly, but we don't have to in order to know that global warming is a bad idea.

What geologists can't do is predict current and future consequences of global warming and climate changes through our expert knowledge of the Paleozoic and Mesozoic eras.

The economic future does not look good, but addressing Global Warming may be the light at the end of the tunnel.

But if global warming is real and we don't act, future generations will never forgive us.

The standstil of global average temperature predicted by the «improved» modell compared to warming predicted from the «old» modell is nothing that happens in the future, it should have happened (but did not happen) in the past, from 1985 to 1999: The «improved» modell (green graph) shows that the global average temperature did not change from 1985 (= mean 1980 - 1990) to 1999 (= mean 1994 to 2004).

And these newly - constituted Vaclav Klaus Climate Joke Awards will be given out through out the year, and through out the years, any day of the week will do, just send in your nominations and we will clear them with the awards committee, and these awards will be given out to people espouse very stupid notions about the very real reality of global warming and the possible impact it may have on future generations of Earthlings (include the human species).

The bottom line in this analysis is that both observations of the past decades and models looking forward to the future do not suggest that one can explain the heavy rains of Harvey by global warming, and folks that are suggesting it are poorly informing the public and decision makers.

My reading of this statement is that you are saying that the likelihood that global warming is increasing the destructive potential of hurricanes (and is likely to do so increasingly in the future) is irrelevant to the policy debate about hurricane damage.

Journalists dealing with global warming and similar issues would do well to focus on the points of deep consensus, generate stories containing voices that illuminate instead of confuse, convey the complex without putting readers (or editors) to sleep, and cast science in its role as a signpost pointing toward possible futures, not as a font of crystalline answers.

I wrote a GLOBAL WARMING PROTEST SONG, not to enterain people but to help raise the alarm, and I hope some singer out there with much better vocals that the Texas warbler who recorded this for me can do a better version in the future.

In light of the recent IPCC report released this past week and stating essentially that global warming is a runaway train that can't be stopped for centuries, it may be tempting to give up hope for a brighter future... But like any patient who suffers from a chronic disease that is potentially fatal, not only is education about the condition itself essential, but also what we can do to help mitigate its impact.

[4] While a range of positions is possible, it seems particularly strange that ExxonMobil takes the position that it does in that future global warming will be caused most by emissions from use of coal rather than by emissions from use of petroleum or natural gas.

The danger of global warming is as yet unseen, but real enough for us to make changes and sacrifices, so that we do not live at the expense of future generations.

Please do not put the burden of risky operations, global warming pollution, and un-mitigatable ecosystem destruction on the people and future generations of the Northwest.

We don't need climate models to project future global warming.

Global warming — doesn't mean we'll all just have warmer weather in future.

But though we've failed to bring forth meaningful policies that will prevent future warming, I do believe that eventually we will, and we might, if we are lucky, prevent a rise in global temperatures beyond 3C.

UPI: Trees in the continental United States could send out spring leaves many days earlier in the future than they did before global warming, researchers say.

It seems as though the magnitude of the model biases in global average temperature do have some relationship with the magnitude of modeled future warming.

You don't have to engage here long before you come to the conclusion that from the well - dressed bureaucrats, to the crony capitalists, to the hard - core leftist youth, there is no one promoting the UN global warming cause we dare trust to plan our future.

Agriculture must feed 7bn people, and to do this already emits somewhere between 25 % and 33 % of all greenhouse gases into the atmosphere, to drive global warming and put future food supplies at hazard.

The weather we've seen this fall may or may not be due to the global warming trend, but it's certainly a clear picture of what the future is going to look like if we don't act quickly to cut emissions of the greenhouse gases.

There is much that can still be done to reduce future climate impacts, and those efforts will depend far more on how quickly we can accelerate declines in the carbon intensity of the global economy than on what target we pick today for eventual warming.

By the way, despite almost everybody assuming that global warming should continue sometime in the near future, once the recovery ends the most probable outcome would be a return to Holocene general cooling and I don't think we can put enough GHGs in the atmosphere to prevent that from happening.

«(5) That some of the adverse and potentially catastrophic effects of global warming are at risk of occurring and not a certainty does not negate the harm persons suffer from actions that increase the likelihood, extent, and severity of such future impacts.

But the damage is done, of course and now they (and others) can quote that «opinion» in the future in support of doing nothing on global warming.

Let not future generations, impacted by global warming, say of us, «They knew but did not act».

As for the MWP, we don't know that global temps were «as high or higher» than today, but even if they were the fact that it would have been due to some «natural» factor (s) rather than CO2 doesn't alter our expectation that increased CO2 levels should have caused warming in recent decades and should do in the future.

Summary: The observed shrinking of CO2's influence on global warming does not bode well for the future longevity of the AGW hypothesis.

But it does mean that the IPCC's climate scientists were wrong about future global warming, and that the consensus is now changing due to actual climate reality.

However, with all the above stated, this does not mean that climate change is not happening; that human activities have no influence on weather and climate; nor that global warming won't occur in the near future.

Exxon showed in legal filings how California cities did not disclose said risks in bond offerings to investors when they started suing the company over future global warming damages.

What is the evidence that people, like the proponents here, use to prove that we humans are responsible for global warming and that future warming will be catastrophic if we don't get our act together?

Even if climate sensitivity is on the lower end, if we don't get our emissions under control, we will still see a dangerous amount of global warming (more details on this to come in a future blog post).

«The global warming that has occurred so far is merely a fraction of what we're going to see in the future, and global warming does not mean we're not going to have winters,» Singh explained.

When asked, «How much do you think global warming will harm future generations of people?»

Because nations have failed to make commitments to reduce global greenhouse gas emissions to levels that will limit future warming do 2 °C, there is an increasing sense of urgency among climate scientists around the world on the need for all nations to significantly increase their greenhouse gas emissions reductions commitments to their fair share of safe global emissions.