Sentences with phrase «less a climate scientist»

Not exact matches

John Beddington, the UK government's chief scientific adviser, says that climate scientists should be less hostile to doubters who question man - made global warming, and that public confidence in science depends on more openness to varied opinions.

The demotion from hurricane to tropical storm does not make the event any less deadly, says Noah Diffenbaugh, a climate scientist at Stanford University.

Hansen told reporters at a press conference yesterday that he hoped the paper — to be published online this week — would influence global climate talks this December in Paris and encourage negotiators to reconsider their goal of keeping warming to less than 2 °C above preindustrial levels, a laudable but insufficient target, some scientists say.

Udall, a senior water and climate scientist / scholar at CSU's Colorado Water Institute, said, «The future of Colorado River is far less rosy than other recent assessments have portrayed.

«Lesser prairie - chicken survival relies on the combination of habitat and climate, and larger areas of habitat provide more opportunities for them to survive a difficult climate,» said USGS scientist and study co-author Clint Boal.

Scientists looked at modeled predictions of climate change and reproductive data from lesser prairie - chickens from 2001 - 2011 to determine how weather conditions affect reproductive success in the Southern High Plains.

The committee found that scientists can now confidently attribute some heat waves and cold events, and to a lesser degree droughts and extreme rainfall, to human - caused climate change.

A new batch of stolen emails between climate scientists hit the Web yesterday, less than a week before U.N. climate talks begin in South Africa.

«Results from this study are based on current climate projections, and it doesn't necessarily mean that lesser prairie - chickens will experience a population decline,» said Blake Grisham, Texas Tech University scientist and lead author of the study.

The study also finds that Tea Party supporters with higher levels of education are less likely to trust scientists or accept scientific consensus on topics like evolution or climate change, which runs opposite to the positive effect education has on trust in science among Independents and Democrats.

Earth's average temperature has remained more or less steady since 2001, despite rising levels of atmospheric carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases — a trend that has perplexed most climate scientists.

When the foundation severed ties, its decision was less influenced by the removal of Jewish scientists from major posts than by the destabilising effect that this and other political interventions had on the general research climate.

Healthy coral reefs usually bounce back after a hurricane passes through, but climate change can make reefs less resilient, scientists say.

Previously, scientists understood that global warming would further «green» the Arctic but had less understanding of the degree and how these shifts would interact with the climate itself.

Oxford University atmospheric physicist Raymond Pierrehumbert, who is among the scientists who believe cutting methane should be less of a priority than cutting carbon dioxide to tackle climate change, said the study is useful in evaluating methane capture systems at landfills.

It's rather less constructive for climate scientists to spend their time engaging in endless rounds of nit - picking with denialists who are in the end unconvincable.

NASA Warming Scientist Hansen Blasts Obama's «Counterfeit» Climate Bill — Calls it «a monstrous absurdity... less than worthless!»

The findings also show that the loss of ice from calving has remained more or less constant through the 20th century, says Dr Ruth Mottram, a climate scientist at the Danish Meteorological Institute who wasn't involved in the study.

To make matter worse there are still «climate scientists» such as yourself who choose to ignore the legimate issues raised and demand that lesser mortals accept your pronouncements without question because you are a «climate scientist» and they are not.

And that climate scientists waiting for peer review articles as a way to cautiously respond to criticism is froth with weakness exploitable by those who could not care less about it.

Postscript, April 6, 12:14 p.m. Alan Robock, a Rutgers University climate scientist who has been studying the nuclear winter hypothesis since the beginning, is concerned that The Times has given too much weight to the early notion of a less severe «nuclear autumn.»

Some veteran climate scientists, while eager for cuts in heat - trapping emissions, warn that descriptions of climatic tipping points or thresholds could backfire in the absence of evidence, leading to less public support for action.

However, far less than 5 % of climate scientists are skeptical of AGW.

He needs his perception that climate scientists are remiss because they are less than perfect hauled back to reality.

My take is that the tug of war over what's causing today's telegenic heat waves, floods, tempests — and even Arctic sea - ice retreats — distracts from the high confidence scientists have in the long - term (but less sexy) picture: that more CO2 will lead to centuries of climate and coastal changes with big consequences for a growing human population (for better and worse in the short run, and likely mostly for the worse in the long run).

As I was interviewing as many scientists and other experts as I could find, I came to realize that the science around biomass's climate impacts is much less murky than it's made to seem.

It's not that CC won't affect these things in the long term, rather when Climate Scientists make bold predictions on 50/50 propositions (or less) and are wrong, the public doesn't distinguish «wrong this year» from «wrong this century.»

It was a good deed to give Dennis Schmitt a forum to respond to Patrick Michaels since Michaels doesn't offer one, we need to see less of the tug of war and more of the real evolving science as scientists strive to fill in gaps in data and missing links in climate models, and to understand feedbacks and the coupled dynamics of land, air and water.

I would be better of if more of the climate scientists were more sober and less alarming in their statements.

The report on impacts of climate change — one of three main sections of each of the panel's periodic assessments — has long been seen by some climate scientists, including some participants in the I.P.C.C. process, as a relatively weak element in the overall effort, in part because it has less scientific literature to draw on.

Mike Hulme, a climate scientist at the University of East Anglia in England and the author of a book on the struggle over climate policy, «Why We Disagree About Climate Change,» said that big gatherings of world leaders were less likely to bear fruit than splitting the challenge into pieces that are tractable, and focusing directly on addressing those prclimate scientist at the University of East Anglia in England and the author of a book on the struggle over climate policy, «Why We Disagree About Climate Change,» said that big gatherings of world leaders were less likely to bear fruit than splitting the challenge into pieces that are tractable, and focusing directly on addressing those prclimate policy, «Why We Disagree About Climate Change,» said that big gatherings of world leaders were less likely to bear fruit than splitting the challenge into pieces that are tractable, and focusing directly on addressing those prClimate Change,» said that big gatherings of world leaders were less likely to bear fruit than splitting the challenge into pieces that are tractable, and focusing directly on addressing those problems.

The take - home message from climate scientists and meteorologists, not surprisingly, is that heat waves — and new record highs — are ever more likely while unusually cold stretches — and new cold records — are ever less likely.

This rules out the beliefs of many prominent climate scientist contrarians, like Roy Spencer (who believes equilibrium sensitivity is around 1.3 °C) and Richard Lindzen (who believes it's less than 1 °C).

Another way of saying it: Although we are seeing less outright false balance in climate coverage than a decade or two ago, bias against mainstream science understanding persists in the relatively subtle form of selective reporting of eyebrow - raising claims, which strengthen the impression that scientists are always changing their story, in which case, shrug.

It is nothing less than an astonishing height of arrogance that a layman who has apparently never published any climate - related research in peer - reviewed journals believes he knows something more than literally thousands of climate scientists engaged in climate modeling and research all over the world.

My sense is increasingly that what's under attack is less and less the merits of the climate consensus and more and more the credibility and integrity of scientists and science itself.

In the last year, my discussions with people who resent AGW talk have more and more been about science and scientists that people disresepct, and less and less about climate arguments and facts that they disbelieve.

They then made the observation that sceptical climate scientists got fewer papers into the journals, and were cited less.

Climate scientists Pat Michaels and Chip Knappenberger of the Cato Institute used a climate model emulator that was developed with the support of EPA to determine that complete adoption of the CPP would have resulted in a temperature reduction of less than two one - hundredths of a degree Celsius by the yeaClimate scientists Pat Michaels and Chip Knappenberger of the Cato Institute used a climate model emulator that was developed with the support of EPA to determine that complete adoption of the CPP would have resulted in a temperature reduction of less than two one - hundredths of a degree Celsius by the yeaclimate model emulator that was developed with the support of EPA to determine that complete adoption of the CPP would have resulted in a temperature reduction of less than two one - hundredths of a degree Celsius by the year 2100.

This past summer, a disconcerting new scientific study by the climate scientist Michiel Schaeffer and colleagues — published in the journal Nature Climate Change — suggested that no matter how quickly we cut this pollution, we are unlikely to keep the seas from climbing less than fivclimate scientist Michiel Schaeffer and colleagues — published in the journal Nature Climate Change — suggested that no matter how quickly we cut this pollution, we are unlikely to keep the seas from climbing less than fivClimate Change — suggested that no matter how quickly we cut this pollution, we are unlikely to keep the seas from climbing less than five feet.

led by our noses by Western (climate) scientists who have less of a scientific agenda and more of a political agenda.

At the end of my August 7th blog piece, I mentioned how any prominent person insinuating that industry money corrupts skeptic climate scientists seems to be separated from Ross Gelbspan by three degrees or less.

It does nothing to alleviate the appearance of any prominent accusation against skeptic climate scientists being separated from Gelbspan by three degrees or less.

However, the Climate Action Tracker, a group of climate scientists and policy experts, says the EU submission is «less ambiClimate Action Tracker, a group of climate scientists and policy experts, says the EU submission is «less ambiclimate scientists and policy experts, says the EU submission is «less ambitiousâ?

It is likely to affirm that scientists are more certain than ever — at least 95 %, up from 90 % previously — that climate change is happening and is mostly caused by human actions, but it may suggest that the climate is slightly less sensitive to carbon than some outlying research has posited.

The climate scientists behind the report are less ready, however, to predict what the specific impacts of global warming will look like in the coming decades, meaning it won't be very useful for regional planners.

«Natural droughts like the 1930s Dust Bowl and the current drought in the Southwest have historically lasted maybe a decade or a little less,» said Ben Cook, climate scientist at NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies and the Lamont - Doherty Earth Observatory at Columbia University in New York City, and lead author of the study.

«We have to consume less: Climate scientists call for radical economic overhaul to avert climate crisis (DemocracClimate scientists call for radical economic overhaul to avert climate crisis (Democracclimate crisis (Democracy Now!)

Climate change skeptics, most of whom are not scientists, are touting the study, saying it blasts gaping holes in global warming theory and shows that future warming will be less than feared.

The trust in that case would be more along the lines of the less informed public, and that includes many of those persons responsible for policy, «trusting» the advocacy of climate scientists, in a general way, being backed, more or less, with hard science evidence.