But
much uncertainty remains.
For the most extreme scenarios and for the time scales of several hundred years or longer
much uncertainty remains, but
much uncertainty remains also on the significance of the development after we have reached the maximum and the concentration has turned back on the lessening trend.
Not exact matches
Uncertainty remains in terms of how
much additional overseas production is going to «merge into the marketplace,» Ferley said.
While the benefits of distributed ledgers have been
much discussed, Bain concluded that actual tools using blockchain for international payments and trade finance
remain in their early stages as banks
remain challenged by scaling the technology, along with
uncertainties surrounding digital currencies and privacy issues.
The
uncertainty around potential output
remains high because it is not clear how
much productive capacity will ultimately be rebuilt as the economy strengthens.
But with only a few assets
remaining, and not
much uncertainty with regards to the value of the
remaining assets, I think the stock is currently trading at an attractive discount.
In Process and Reality, the account is carried
much farther, although substantial
uncertainties remain.
It
remains to be seen how
much Hillary Clinton can benefit from the week here in Philadelphia or if Donald Trump will continue to use
uncertainty and violence in the world to his advantage.
Its behaviour looks like what happens in the real world, but Erickson stresses that «the
uncertainties remain large», and that
much more work needs to be done before such models can be used to predict future climate trends.
Much uncertainty still
remains about the number of people with serious illness, he said, and it's clear that the novel H1N1 can kill perfectly healthy people.
«We've recently concluded that there's not
much doubt or cause for concern over produced - water discharges in Norway's North Sea sector today, although some
uncertainty remains,» says Sanni.
Yet
much uncertainty hangs on what are expected to be rancorous negotiations with the European Union, covering issues such as the right of foreign citizens to
remain in the United Kingdom and a possible exit bill from Brussels.
Scientific knowledge input into process based models has
much improved, reducing
uncertainty of known science for some components of sea - level rise (e.g. steric changes), but when considering other components (e.g. ice melt from ice sheets, terrestrial water contribution) science is still emerging, and
uncertainties remain high.
It's true that Time may have lost some of the subtleties regarding the
remaining uncertainties, but their reporting comes
much closer to conveying the true state of the subject than the «false balance» model which would quote Bill Gray one time for each time or two you quote Suki Manabe.
A responsible skeptic will request that you
remain open minded to opinions from both sides, and consider the
uncertainties involved * without * prejudging them based on the demonstrable human predilection toward a «herd mentality» — by «herd mentality», I mean that once a consensus is formed, a flock of «me too» science papers become
much more easily accepted, by peer review journals, than the skeptics» papers.
In terms of the future evolution of climate change: So
much now depends on the what happens in the Arctic and whilst there
remains uncertainty as to what is next in terms of the sea ice there is a consequent
uncertainty in it's secondary impacts.
I noted how the overall rate in some studies, even on the scale of meters per millennium, «is not one of these uber - catastropes,» but that how
much variation can occur within a century
remains saddled with
uncertainty, producing an «ugly mix of long - term certainty and short term murkiness.»
It seems likely to be a combination of factors / definitional differences — as Dr Rogelj says — account for the difference between the IAM and non-IAM budgets, as both physical climate
uncertainties and technical / societal
uncertainties regarding how
much we are able to reduce contributions to warming from non-CO2 matter to estimates of
remaining budgets.»
First, while it is important to understand the
remaining uncertainties in climate science, it is critical to also realize how
much we do understand about the climate.
When a show of hands is required to address
uncertainties on separate climate issues I think the integrated view
remains very
much in play.
It's clear that John Kennedy and other scientists who have worked on the issue have learned
much, but it's likely that there
remain opportunities for further science that will improve the understanding and provide better estimates both for SST and in particular for the related
uncertainties.
He says that, in terms of climate science research, scientists still need to address the
remaining uncertainties in the carbon cycle: where and how fast the carbon released into the atmosphere goes, how
much stays in the atmosphere, whether there are limits to some natural sinks for carbon and whether there are important new sources of carbon emissions that may be triggered by warming.
There
remains some
uncertainty about how
much decadal variability of GMST that is attributed to AMO in some studies is actually related to forcing, notably from aerosols.
While
uncertainty does increase at finer scales (e.g., 25 - kilometer grid squares compared to 1,000 - kilometer grid squares), the fact
remains that
much of the total
uncertainty in regional changes actually arises from the larger scales.
Nothing
much has changed; in the
uncertainty that is still rife six months after the vote, capital market oriented finance solutions are still rare, with non UK deals
remaining relatively active.
In any event, some degree of
uncertainty as to how
much «movement» is required, still
remains after these judgments.