Sentences with phrase «more about climate change science»

Alan Carlin knows more about climate change science than most of the people on the EPA work group that wrote the endangerment proposal.

Not exact matches

Mirko Drotschmann, or MrWissen2go, a science blogger with about 500,000 subscribers who has recently posted videos on Germany's political parties, Islamic State and climate change, said he would have liked to grill her more on the refugee crisis.

I confess that I have become somewhat blasé about the range of exciting — I think revolutionary is probably more accurate — technologies that we are rolling out today: our work in genomics and its translation into varieties that are reaching poor farmers today; our innovative integration of long — term and multilocation trials with crop models and modern IT and communications technology to reach farmers in ways we never even imagined five years ago; our vision to create a C4 rice and see to it that Golden Rice reaches poor and hungry children; maintaining productivity gains in the face of dynamic pests and pathogens; understanding the nature of the rice grain and what makes for good quality; our many efforts to change the way rice is grown to meet the challenges of changing rural economies, changing societies, and a changing climate; and, our extraordinary array of partnerships that has placed us at the forefront of the CGIAR change process through the Global Rice Science Partnership.

When compared to other religious groups, Evangelicals have often been more wary of science as evidenced in debates about evolution, stem cell research, and climate change.

Climate Change — Want to know more about climate change — the science, impacts and political Climate Change — Want to know more about climate change — the science, impacts and political dChange — Want to know more about climate change — the science, impacts and political climate change — the science, impacts and political dchange — the science, impacts and political debate?

The initiative encourages Americans to think of climate change as a risk management issue; the panel aims to clarify and contextualize the science so the public and decision - makers can be more adequately informed about those risks and possible ways to manage them.

They're more about adapting to climate change,» says Laura Diaz Anadon, a science - policy researcher at Harvard University.

The Review is a super refined weekly web publication curated by subject matter experts from Yale who summarize important research articles from leading natural and social science journals with the hope that people can make more informed decisions using latest research results.The Review launched this week and covers a wide range of topics, like this brief about climate change and biodiversity («Biodiversity Left Behind in Climate Change Scenarios»): They find that simply using the traditional classification of a species in climate change simulations can underestimate the true scale of biodiversitclimate change and biodiversity («Biodiversity Left Behind in Climate Change Scenarios»): They find that simply using the traditional classification of a species in climate change simulations can underestimate the true scale of biodiversitychange and biodiversity («Biodiversity Left Behind in Climate Change Scenarios»): They find that simply using the traditional classification of a species in climate change simulations can underestimate the true scale of biodiversitClimate Change Scenarios»): They find that simply using the traditional classification of a species in climate change simulations can underestimate the true scale of biodiversityChange Scenarios»): They find that simply using the traditional classification of a species in climate change simulations can underestimate the true scale of biodiversitclimate change simulations can underestimate the true scale of biodiversitychange simulations can underestimate the true scale of biodiversity loss.

Climate Change — Want to know more about global warming — the science, impacts and political debate?

Nisbet's prior research examining public opinion about climate change and energy insecurity also revealed for science communicators that understanding the public in more precise ways than partisanship or ideology allowed for improved outreach.

Since then, scientists have learned more about crop science, climate change and other factors.

The organization representing more than 600 public school boards across the state says how science is taught in the classroom will influence how a generation of students think about climate change.

NONE of them have questioned the science behind climate change for more than a decade; they may argue about which policies are the best way to address the problem, what mix of government regulations and private sector actions is best, but not one challenges the science.

We could have a more sensitive debate about climate change science.

As I explained last winter in my Issues in Science and Technology essay, I've unlearned almost as many things as I've learned about human - caused climate change in more than a quarter century of reporting on the issue.

I read this website to become more acquainted with the science of climate change (I'm also attending Prof. Archer's Coursera class on climate change right now), and because this website seems trustworthy to me as someone who doesn't know enough about climate science to decide for myself who's right or wrong about this subject.

I beg to disagree with the basic thesis of this article: that the public are becoming more sceptical about climate change through a failure to understand the science.

After all, any conclusion about the pace of emissions cuts necessary to limit dangers from climate change is implicitly as much (or more) about economics as science.

All in all the science of hurricanes does appear to be much more fun and interesting than the average climate change issue, as there is a debate, a «fight» between different hypothesis, predictions compared to near - future observations, and all that does not always get pre-eminence in the exchanges about models.

Turned out the event was less about science than it was about communications — and the challenges of communicating about climate change were never more visible, or more daunting.

Over the past seven years, I wish we had been more forthcoming with three messages: We should have conceded, prominently, that the news about climate change is unwelcome, that today's climate science is incomplete, and that every «solution» carries risk.

The more people talk about climate change the better, as far as I'm concerned: the science is so conclusive now that only by not talking about the reality of it can people continue in blissful ignorance along the path they have taken.

More than 650 scientists from around the world dispute the claims made by the United Nations and former Vice President Al Gore about global warming, saying that science does not support that climate change is a manmade phenomenon, according to a posting on the Senate environmental committee's press blog.

This thread seems more about policy than the science of climate change.

Since 1951, Earth's climate has warmed by about 0.6 degrees Celsius, and researchers assessing the state of climate science for the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) are 95 percent certain that more than half of the warming is due to human emissions of greenhouseclimate has warmed by about 0.6 degrees Celsius, and researchers assessing the state of climate science for the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) are 95 percent certain that more than half of the warming is due to human emissions of greenhouseclimate science for the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) are 95 percent certain that more than half of the warming is due to human emissions of greenhouseClimate Change (IPCC) are 95 percent certain that more than half of the warming is due to human emissions of greenhouse gases.

Lindzen may feel compelled to «mislead» about science because he sincerely believes more harm will befall us if society follows the policy outcomes of the scientific consensus on climate change.

Join us to learn more about the science and the interlinkages between air pollution, SLCPs and climate change This webinar will include presentations on the science behind the three issues, examples of local policy and civil society initiatives and an outlook to UNEA III.

But 73 percent of museum visitors said that they would like to learn more about climate change and that they trusted informal science institutions more than any other source to provide that information.

People more concerned about the issue of climate change also tend to know more about science, generally.15

For example, people who know more about science also tend to perceive strong consensus among climate scientists that human activity is responsible for climate change.

While recent headlines about the woes of U.N. - led efforts to assemble a comprehensive picture of the science have caused gleeful headlines on The Drudge Report and other skeptical media outlets, the vast weight of the evidence — from melting glaciers to warming oceans to satellite temperature readings, and much more — still points to a changing climate caused by human activity.

It's a common refrain: If people only knew more about the science, there wouldn't be so much polarization on the issue of climate change.

I realize I was trespassing with anecdote in a discussion about science and climate, which requires more than a decade to begin to show trends, but it seems to me that as recent incidents display to some extent climate change under way, it is unwise to ignore the future, which might just accelerate rather than boinging back to neutral.

As might be expected, people's views about whether there is scientific understanding about climate change tie more closely to their science knowledge and education levels.

The effects of science knowledge tend to be modest and inconsistent in predicting people's views about climate change and climate scientists, especially in comparison with the clearer and more striking way that people's views are tied to their political party preferences, ideology and level of personal concern with climate issues.

The Stimulus sent more than $ 26.1 billion in funding toward climate change programs, of which the GAO estimates about 2.5 %, or $ 641 million, went to climate science.

«As an influential blogger on climate change, among other subjects, I'd really like Paul to meet you and chat to you about your views — how you see your role and that more generally the influence of the internet in changing the debate; your views on climate-gate and how that was handled by the media; the failings or otherwise of scientists in communicating the science.»

From my reading of the popular science journal, Scientific American (to which I have subscribed for about 35 years), I can say that it shows a similar preponderance of articles relating climate change to human activities; while it does (correctly) give consideration to some of the more reasonable of the contrary opinion.

I don't think that learning much more about climate has changed much my overall views on climate change or climate science.

3) We need to think about this engagement process as more than just educating journalists or developing effective ways to translate science, we need to think about climate change communication and media coverage as a structural problem.

The effect they were testing: That is, Republicans more than Democrats see climate change solutions as a greater threat to the economy, and Republicans» economic beliefs about climate change policies mediate their skepticism of climate change science...

Yale's «Six Americas» report found that the highly skeptical are more informed about climate change science than those who report a high degree of concern about it (the latter of whom still regularly confuse climate with the ozone hole, etc.).

Sorry, Wyoming schoolchildren, but if you want to learn more about evolution and climate change in class you're on your own, unless you move to a state with a more enlightened government, or at least one with fewer science deniers making the rules.

Rajendra Pachauri, the chairman of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, wants us to believe that UN emissions reductions negotiations are about nothing more than pure science.

For more information about the science of climate change, Ettling recommended NASA's website and skepticalscience.com, a website started by an Australian physicist that lays out claims from skeptics alongside scientific findings.

I've always been agnostic about [climate change]... I don't completely dismiss the more dire warnings but I instinctively feel that some of the claims are exaggerated... I don't accept all of the alarmist conclusions... You can never be absolutely certain that all the science is in.

Actually it reflects more than editorial agendas.The problem is the broader expectation that science can be instructive; that «what to do about climate change» can be simply read off from clear scientific evidence.

EDIT: For anyone wanting to learn more about climate change, I encourage you to check out this special section in Science.

This spectacular man - made global warming / climate change / climate «fragility» fraud has been about nothing except the «political question» ever since the SEEMING of «science» began to be used by the political left — emphasis on the «tranzi» transnational progressives — to perpetrate the pillage and destruction of industrial civilization more than thirty years ago.

«The president can, and should, say much more [about] the strong scientific evidence on human - induced climate change and its impacts on the United States, and the rapidly closing window for action,» say Harvard Prof. Jim McCarthy and UN Foundation President Tim Wirth, giving voice to what Climate Science Watch has argued repeatedly since before President Obama's inauguclimate change and its impacts on the United States, and the rapidly closing window for action,» say Harvard Prof. Jim McCarthy and UN Foundation President Tim Wirth, giving voice to what Climate Science Watch has argued repeatedly since before President Obama's inauguClimate Science Watch has argued repeatedly since before President Obama's inauguration.