Sentences with phrase «how dangerous global warming»

In their study, more than 1,500 randomly selected Americans were asked about their political worldviews and their opinions about how dangerous global warming and nuclear power are.

Not exact matches

We are going to have some more global warming but how much more and when this will become dangerous and irreversible is where we try to set a boundary.

Given the unprecedented rapidity of the human - made climate forcing, it is difficult to establish how soon slow feedbacks will become important, but clearly slow feedbacks should be considered in assessing the «dangerous» level of global warming, as discussed in the next section.

A central dispute was over how scientists can best discuss risks and responses related to inherent, and dangerous, extremes of climate in a world increasingly fixated on how to limit global warming caused by human activity.

How dangerous it is to question the ruling paradigm of human caused global warming, a once interesting idea that the United Nations latched onto with all the enthusiasm of a fox in a hen coop, simultaneously drawing the interest of various national governments, and dragging with it many unwitting but eager scientifically credentialed sycophants.

It's even got a great graph showing how curbing global emissions affects the odds of preventing dangerous levels of global warming (Figure 14 - 3 if you're still following along).

That is decidedly not how this paper is used in public discourse though, I think in many instances this paper is used to say that not only do humans cause global warming, but they are also the major cause and the degree of effect on nature / climate is in some way dangerous and needs to be mitigated.

While the greenhouse effect is undeniably real, and while most scientists agree that there has been a rise in global temperatures caused in some part by human emissions of carbon dioxide, no one knows how much more warming will occur this century or whether it will be dangerous.

True believers in the theory of man - made climate change can't understand how anyone can question the «overwhelming evidence» that mankind is causing dangerous global warming.

Fund managers and investors attending the meeting want oil and gas majors to assess how compatible their assets are with global efforts to avoid dangerous levels of warming.

Proponents of the CAGW gloom and doom disaster scenarios often say that we need to «connect the dots» to understand how CO2 emissions are causing dangerous «accelerated» global warming.

This year the snowmen gathered in front of the House of Parliament in Helsinki to remind members how important the decisions made in 2012 will be for tackling dangerous global warming in the near future.

Given the unprecedented rapidity of the human - made climate forcing, it is difficult to establish how soon slow feedbacks will become important, but clearly slow feedbacks should be considered in assessing the «dangerous» level of global warming, as discussed in the next section.

This was a very good article, in that it generated a lot of discussion, and it taught the author how real peer review works — and basically it once again falsified the «dangerous man - made global warming» conjecture.

Among other things, the authors state that [1] «scientists do not know how large the greenhouse effect is, whether it will lead to a harmful amount of global warming, or (if it will) what should be done about it» (p. 560); [2] that «profound disagreements» about global warming exist within the scientific community (p. 560); [3] that so - called «activist scientists» say that the earth's climate is warming (p. 560); [4] that «science doesn't know whether we are experiencing a dangerous level of global warming or how bad the greenhouse effect Is, if it exists at all» (p. 569); [5] and that global warming is «enmeshed in scientific uncertainty» (p. 573).

Just how «dangerous» are these global warming side effects?