Sentences with phrase «made by climate»

Richard Somerville, a distinguished professor emeritus and research professor at Scripps Institution of Oceanography, UC San Diego, issued a statement in response to a recent request to address claims recently made by climate change denialists.

* According to the Berkeley group, the Earth's surface temperature will have risen (on average) slightly less than what indicated by NASA, NOAA and the Met Office * Differences will be on the edge of statistical significance, leaving a lot open to subjective interpretation * Several attempts will be made by climate change conformists and True Believers to smear the work of BEST, and to prevent them from publishing their data * After publication, organised groups of people will try to cloud the issue to the point of leaving the public unsure about what exactly was found by BEST * New questions will be raised regarding UHI, however the next IPCC assessment's first draft will be singularly forgetful of any peer - reviewed paper on the topic * We will all be left with a slightly - warming world, the only other certitude being that all mitigation efforts will be among the stupidest ideas that ever sprung to human mind.

These numbers, and in fact all numbers you will ever see in the press, are not the raw instrument measurements — they include a number of manual adjustments made by climate scientists to correct for both time of observation as well as changing quality of the measurement site itself.

Alot of this argument made by climate scientists and advocates of public policy changes seems to be in parallel with the same argument about population growth.

Skeptical Science This site, based in Australia, is the go - to resource for debunking specific arguments made by climate deniers.

Several attempts will be made by climate change conformists and True Believers to smear the work of BEST, and to prevent them from publishing their data.

One of the many questionable claims made by climate catastrophists is that climate change causes conflict.

There seem to be several mutually contradictory statements made by climate research skeptics who focus on hurricane activity.

I also hope there are some hidden errors in some of the other projections made by climate scientists, but significant errors that substantially change the predicted outcomes are conspicuous in their absence...

Jan P Perlwitz: Now, one could ask, is this twisting of Gavin's words, that he was asking for blind faith into science, even though his use of the term «bad faith» implies the opposite, he asks for sticking to the truth and to facts, is based on a lack of knowledge about the English language or is this itself an example for how a statement made by a climate scientist is twisted in bad faith, for the purpose to deliberately deceive the public?

But if you had actually followed or understood the link, you would have discovered that it is the first part of a 5 - part series debunking various claims made by climate disruption deniers that Venus» surface is extraordinarily hot due to some non-greenhouse effect cause.

It is no coincidence that the groups publicizing the University of East Anglia email hacking story also have a long history of taking money from oil and coal companies to attack the conclusions made by climate scientists.

And finally, and perhaps most importantly, the future projection of temperature rise made by climate models (upon which the sea level rise projections are based) have been shown by a growing body of scientific research to be overestimated by about 40 percent.

You seem to be fixated on this notion of «average tropospheric temperatures» and yet I have not seen any claims made by climate scientists regarding «average tropospheric temperatures».

All these years Steve has maintained a very clear (and always polite) stance: he proposed himself to audit some data, models, procedures and conclusions, while not defending or declaring any particular position about the claims made by Climate Science regarding anthropogenic climate change, global warming and other similar issues.

Is there a «Most brilliant and sensible statement ever made by a climate blogger» award?

But let's elaborate a bit here on the two basic issues which our Science paper raises, one at a time, and then come back to the issue of whether the models, or the predictions made by climate scientists overall, are any good or not.

Climate is among the most complex phenomena ever attempted to be modeled, and a comparison of actual temperatures to predictions made by climate models shows how imprecise and imperfect the current models are.

Re: «and the alarming projections that have been made by climate scientists for quite a few years now»

The four - month internal investigation by Pennsylvania State University found no evidence for charges made by climate sceptics that Mann had violated university ethics.

I have understood that yes it is accepted that GW is caused by increased human co2 as you explained to me, the point in some dispute is the rate at which it causes it and the alarming projections that have been made by climate scientists for quite a few years now.

All the things you cited are projections made by climate models.

Most of the claims being made by climate change advocates appear to run contrary to basic meteorology.

This new objectively - based climate science undercuts the climate alarmist «consensus,» but also a few points often made by some climate skeptics.

On the other hand, it is fun to point out that according to the predictions made by the climate models that assume late 20th century warming WAS driven by CO2, their model HAS been falsified.

Ethical scientist don't stop making a best estimate or climate sensitivity withou clearly explaining why and the implications for the projections made by climate models.

This was one point made by the climate communicator and campaigner George Marshall here earlier this week.

Some other claims made by climate scientists intent on supporting the mainstream view can also be characterized as ad hoc in a similar manner.

So, no, I am not a climate scientist, nor am I in a position to evaluate any of the claims made by climate scientists regarding solar irradiation or any other influence on global temperatures.

The irony of course is that the video looks like it was made by climate change deniers --- not believers --- as an attack on the supposed «fascism» of those who would mobilize society to reduce greenhouse gases.

That is, he states «I am not a climate scientist, nor am I in a position to evaluate any of the claims made by climate scientists regarding solar irradiation or any other influence on global temperatures.»

A bet HAS been made by the climate community that the models will prove to be accurate.

What you need to do is look at the verified predictions made by climate models.

Indeed, one of the first real - time predictions made by a climate model was for the cooling in 1992 and 1993 as a result of the Mount Pinatubo eruption in June 1991.

We will see what the peer - reviewed scientific literature has to say on the subject, and show that not only have the IPCC surface temperature projections been remarkably accurate, but they have also performed much better than predictions made by climate contrarians.»

They also reexamine the alternative case made by climate deniers: that it is the Sun's changing activity and not us that is causing the Earth to heat up.

Not exact matches

Political scientist Keith Brownsey of Mount Royal University argues the Liberals paid close attention to the many fumbles made by Harper's Tories on the energy file: failing to build solid relationships with First Nations, allowing environmental groups to seize the public - relations initiative, not asserting federal authority and handing provinces like B.C. and Quebec control of the political agenda, keeping Canada outside of the international consensus on climate change, and ignoring legitimate criticisms of the federal review process.

These predictions make sense given the strong support for Trump in coal - producing states and the fact that the Trump EPA transition team is led by a climate science denier.

Trump has said that climate change is a hoax, «created by and for the Chinese in order to make U.S. manufacturing non-competitive.»

Mashable's Senior Editor for Science and Special Projects, Kevin Freedman, in «No, New York Mag: Climate change won't make the Earth uninhabitable by 2100» contrasts the story's gloom against hope and optimism, but mostly analyses the science behind it.

But new side - by - side comparisons from EDGI provide a kind of virtual trip back in time to the web before Trump took office, shedding light on the subtle ways that the administration is making it harder to track down information about climate change and alternative energy sources online.

Protester makes climate change personal: «My home was destroyed by Hurricane Sandy.

«Coal - fired power plants produce almost 40 per cent of global electricity today, making carbon pollution from coal a leading contributor to climate change,» said the declaration issued by the alliance on Thursday.

For example, if the government decides that climate change doesn't exist, «then we as entrepreneurs just got to get in there and and fill the gap and and create hundreds of thousands of jobs and make sure that» we're living in a carbon - neutral world by 2050.

The deflationary economic climate makes it hard to compensate by raising prices.

That was made harder by the climate for funding: there might have been a fair amount of funding over our past decade, especially in Silicon Valley, but that wasn't the landscape in 1987.

What they've found is a country with pretty colonial towns and cities, miles of golden - sand beaches, an equatorial climate tempered by offshore ocean currents and the mountain terrain to make it spring - like year - round, and an incredibly low cost of living.

Monetary policy can make for a more predictable investment climate by keeping inflation low and stable.

BRUSSELS (Reuters)- The European Union and China warned U.S. President Donald Trump on Friday he was making a major error by withdrawing from the Paris climate pact, but the pair failed to agree a formal climate statement because of divisions over trade.

An article published this week in Nature Climate Change (article via Nature paywall) is making the rounds of the headlines because it makes some pretty bold claims — namely that the US State Department under - estimated the emissions impact of the Keystone XL pipeline by up to a factor of four.