We both knew we wanted to take
some kind of action on climate change as soon as we met, but we were not sure what it should be.
Not exact matches
In reference to Michael Glantz's program and the funding by the government - controlled National Science Foundation, the
action to terminate the program smacks
of the
kind of silencing tactics used by the government
on James Hansen
of NASA who also spoke out
on climate change.
This is to say that the «consensus» has political, rather than practical utility: it is more useful to the task
of mobilising towards «
action on climate change» than it is informing the debate about what
kind of problem
climate change is, and what the options for dealing with it are.
The first -
of - its -
kind plan aims at achieving comprehensive
action on climate change by way
of a three-fold goal: cutting domestic carbon pollution, adapting... Continue reading →
Yet as McKibben's article makes clear, the movement has been forced to work around the Obama administration, rather than to prompt the
kinds of transformative government - led
actions on climate change that Obama's election was thought by many to herald.
Despite the large body
of scientific evidence
on climate change, developed over decades, we have not generally been as successful in providing the
kind of information decision - makers need to identify and prioritize the specific
actions required to manage the many individual (and interconnected) risks
of climate change.
While other scientists differ
on pinpointing particular numbers and limits, many who study
climate change agree that some
kind of action is needed.