Sentences with phrase «impacts over climate science»

Not exact matches

We should get the best science and stay abreast of any threat from human impacts, but I am disturbed that we have spent over thirty billion dollars studying climate change and have little to show for it.

The first three volumes, based on outlines approved by the IPCC's 195 member governments in October 2009, were released over the past fourteen months: The Physical Science Basis in September 2013, Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability, in March 2014 and Mitigation of Climate Change in April 2014.

Climate impacts research is in its infancy compared to science on the physical climate, for a number of reasons: attributing cause and effect isn't easy; neither is collecting data over timescales and regions long and large enough such that it's possible to draw any meaningful trends from their anClimate impacts research is in its infancy compared to science on the physical climate, for a number of reasons: attributing cause and effect isn't easy; neither is collecting data over timescales and regions long and large enough such that it's possible to draw any meaningful trends from their anclimate, for a number of reasons: attributing cause and effect isn't easy; neither is collecting data over timescales and regions long and large enough such that it's possible to draw any meaningful trends from their analysis.

To be sure a «debate» over whether or not human activity is altering the climate still rages, but it is not a clear - headed objective debate about the science among scientists actually working in the relevant fields, it's a debate about the science and its impact on human society in the court of public opinion.

Iâ $ ™ d still like to see Willis and his fellow AGW recalcitrants start a fresh debate over there so I can see them put those wacky climate scientists in their place and teach them a thing or to about real science, the type that doesnâ $ ™ t impact on business profits.

They review the work of over 30,000 scientific papers on climate science, the impacts of warming and how its effects can be avoided.

Over the last 20 years the rate is 25 percent faster than the rate in any twenty years period in the preceding 115 years (Rahmstorf et al., Science Express, 2007, Potsdam Institute of Climate Impact Research, 2007).

July 19: Dr. Stephen Schneider passed away unexpectedly in London • July 17: The Polar Science Center observes anomalous drop in Arctic ice volume • July 16: The National Academy of Sciences released a summary report on climate stabilization targets pertaining to emissions, concentrations, and impacts over decades to millennia.

As Skeptical Science readers are undoubtely well aware, the impact of natural climate drivers has been very thoroughly studied, and they simply can not account for the observed global warming or climate change, especially over the past 50 - 65 years (Figure 1).

On what specific basis do you disregard the conclusions of the United States Academy of Sciences, and numerous other Academies of Sciences around the World including the Royal Academy of the UK, over a hundred of the most prestigious scientific organizations whose membership includes those with expertise relevant to the science of climate change, including the American Association for the Advancement of Science, the American Geophysical Union, the American Institute of Physics, the American Meteorological Society, the Royal Meteorological Society, and according to the American Academy of Sciences, 97 percent of scientists who actually do peer - reviewed research on climate change whose conclusions hold that the Earth is warming, that the warming is mostly human caused, that harsh impacts from warming are already being experienced in parts of the world, and that the international community is running out of time to prevent catastrophic wscience of climate change, including the American Association for the Advancement of Science, the American Geophysical Union, the American Institute of Physics, the American Meteorological Society, the Royal Meteorological Society, and according to the American Academy of Sciences, 97 percent of scientists who actually do peer - reviewed research on climate change whose conclusions hold that the Earth is warming, that the warming is mostly human caused, that harsh impacts from warming are already being experienced in parts of the world, and that the international community is running out of time to prevent catastrophic wScience, the American Geophysical Union, the American Institute of Physics, the American Meteorological Society, the Royal Meteorological Society, and according to the American Academy of Sciences, 97 percent of scientists who actually do peer - reviewed research on climate change whose conclusions hold that the Earth is warming, that the warming is mostly human caused, that harsh impacts from warming are already being experienced in parts of the world, and that the international community is running out of time to prevent catastrophic warming.

On what specific basis do you disregard the conclusions of the United States Academy of Sciences, and numerous other Academies of Sciences Around the World including the Royal Academy of the UK, over a hundred of the most prestigious scientific organizations whose membership includes those with expertise relevant to the science of climate change, including the American Association for the Advancement of Science, the American Geophysical Union, the American Institute of Physics, the American Meteorological Society, the Royal Meteorological Society, and according to the American Academy of Sciences 97 percent of scientists who actually do peer - reviewed research on climate change which conclusions hold that the Earth is warming, that the warming is mostly human caused, and that harsh impacts from warming are already being experienced in parts of the world, and that the international community is running out of time to prevent catastrophic wscience of climate change, including the American Association for the Advancement of Science, the American Geophysical Union, the American Institute of Physics, the American Meteorological Society, the Royal Meteorological Society, and according to the American Academy of Sciences 97 percent of scientists who actually do peer - reviewed research on climate change which conclusions hold that the Earth is warming, that the warming is mostly human caused, and that harsh impacts from warming are already being experienced in parts of the world, and that the international community is running out of time to prevent catastrophic wScience, the American Geophysical Union, the American Institute of Physics, the American Meteorological Society, the Royal Meteorological Society, and according to the American Academy of Sciences 97 percent of scientists who actually do peer - reviewed research on climate change which conclusions hold that the Earth is warming, that the warming is mostly human caused, and that harsh impacts from warming are already being experienced in parts of the world, and that the international community is running out of time to prevent catastrophic warming.

On what specific basis do you disregard the mainstream scientific view that holds that the Earth is warming, that the warming is mostly human caused, and that harsh impacts from warming are very likely under business - as - usual, conclusions supported by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, the United States Academy of Sciences and over a hundred of the most prestigious scientific organizations in the world whose membership includes scientists with expertise relevant to the science of climate change including the American Association for the Advancement of Science, the American Geophysical Union, the American Institute of Physics, the American Meteorological Society, the Royal Meteorological Society, and the Royal Society of the UK and according to the American Academy of Sciences 97 percent of scientists who actually do peer - reviewed research on climate Climate Change, the United States Academy of Sciences and over a hundred of the most prestigious scientific organizations in the world whose membership includes scientists with expertise relevant to the science of climate change including the American Association for the Advancement of Science, the American Geophysical Union, the American Institute of Physics, the American Meteorological Society, the Royal Meteorological Society, and the Royal Society of the UK and according to the American Academy of Sciences 97 percent of scientists who actually do peer - reviewed research on climate science of climate change including the American Association for the Advancement of Science, the American Geophysical Union, the American Institute of Physics, the American Meteorological Society, the Royal Meteorological Society, and the Royal Society of the UK and according to the American Academy of Sciences 97 percent of scientists who actually do peer - reviewed research on climate climate change including the American Association for the Advancement of Science, the American Geophysical Union, the American Institute of Physics, the American Meteorological Society, the Royal Meteorological Society, and the Royal Society of the UK and according to the American Academy of Sciences 97 percent of scientists who actually do peer - reviewed research on climate Science, the American Geophysical Union, the American Institute of Physics, the American Meteorological Society, the Royal Meteorological Society, and the Royal Society of the UK and according to the American Academy of Sciences 97 percent of scientists who actually do peer - reviewed research on climate climate change?

«Over the last 50 years, most environmental science has focused on the impact of climate change.

The scientists could get on with the science, go to conferences, argue over climate sensitivity or the impact of CO2 on the oceans or whatever.

The views in the clips are extreme but represent a grab bag of climate science denialist talking points, ignoring the mountains of evidence gathered from multiple sources over many decades of the impacts of loading the atmosphere and the oceans with carbon dioxide from burning fossil fuels.

Climate impacts research is in its infancy compared to science on the physical climate, for a number of reasons: attributing cause and effect isn't easy; neither is collecting data over timescales and regions long and large enough such that it's possible to draw any meaningful trends from their anClimate impacts research is in its infancy compared to science on the physical climate, for a number of reasons: attributing cause and effect isn't easy; neither is collecting data over timescales and regions long and large enough such that it's possible to draw any meaningful trends from their anclimate, for a number of reasons: attributing cause and effect isn't easy; neither is collecting data over timescales and regions long and large enough such that it's possible to draw any meaningful trends from their analysis.

Part one introduces the series themes and basically reviews the current state of the science, while part two outlines how climate change impacts could lead to global demographic, agricultural and political instability and even outright armed conflict, including a nuclear exchange in South Asia over rapidly depleting water supplies.

«These results indicate that varying geoengineering efforts by region and over different periods of time could potentially improve the effectiveness of solar geoengineering and reduce climate impacts in at - risk areas,» says co-author Ken Caldeira, Senior Scientist in the Department of Global Ecology at the Carnegie Institution for Science.

Based on a century of ocean plankton science and the 10 international experiments on iron fertilization over the last 15 years we are confident that the scale, methods and technologies of the work we are planning will have positive impacts on all fronts, improving water quality, buffering surface water acidity, recharging the marine food chain, and safely sequestering enormous amounts of CO2 to help slow climate change.

The hearing's goal was to discuss the «debate over climate science, the impact of federal funding on the objectivity of climate research, and the ways in which political pressure can suppress opposing viewpoints in the field of climate science.»