Sentences with phrase «now believe in climate change»

Not exact matches

Cuomo, who has had to cope with the aftermath of two major storms in his two years in office — Irene in 2011, and now Sandy — says the state could be better prepared for climate change that the governor believes could be the new normal.

Too many of the citizens of the US and Britain still believe there is substantive scientific uncertainty about climate change — even as George Bush lives in a «green,» off - grid home and now says climate change is real.

The gist is that most Americans have heard of Global Climate Change but believe that the effects will be slow in coming so we should take slow, cheap steps for now.

It may be somewhat in jest, but it now gives fuel to those who believe climate change (Global Warming has become a vilified word) is not real or just a money making scheme.

I have posted on RealClimate about 4 times in the past 5 years regarding the potential thaw of the methal hydrate deposits at the bottom of the oceans.I stated in my posts on your website that I believe firmly that those deposits are in quite a good bit of danger of melting from climate change feedback mechanisms.On Nov 8th, ScienceDaily posted a huge new study on the PETM boundary 55 million years ago, and some key data on how the methane at that point may very well have melted and contributed to the massive climate shift.I am an amateur who reads in the new a lot about climate change.I'd now like to say «I told you so!!!»

Too many of the citizens of the US and Britain still believe there is substantive scientific uncertainty about climate change — even as George Bush lives in a «green,» off - grid home and now says climate change is real.

Numerous surveys — here's one from George Mason and Yale universities — show that Americans now overwhelmingly believe climate change is real and caused by humans, and that it threatens people in the United States.

He said that the large majority of governments at the Second Meeting of the conference of Parties to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (held in Geneva in June 1996), «while recognizing uncertainties, believe that we know enough to take some actions now,» and that this position was supported by more than 2000 independent scientists in a letter to President Clinton several weeks ago.

Now, the whole point of this bet may be to take money from skeptics who don't bother to educate themselves on climate and believe Rush Limbaugh or whoever that there has never been any change in world temperatures.

Whether or not everyone «believes» in climate change is now immaterial with regard to increasing impacts on trend.

It is apparently now «headline news» that the man who will be in charge of all of our public lands, which are being devastated by human - caused climate change — some of which was caused by fossil fuels extracted from those lands — doesn't believe there is a massive conspiracy carried out by the entire global scientific community and literally every single major government in the world, including our own, to fool the public and media.

Regardless of what you believe about Climate Change an enormous investment in replacement generating capacity is going to have to be made between now and 2030.

74 % of people would take immediate action to change their lifestyle now if they knew that climate change would affect their children's lives 52 % of people believe that their actions as an individual can help stop the effects of climate change Only a quarter (26 %) believe that climate change is already impacting on the UK Respondents cited flooding as one of the most common effects of climate change that will happen in the UK (69 %)

Believe Willard should now have enough references to understand what is meant by «CAGW» or «catastrophic climate change», as it has been called in the UK.

Given that in ratifying the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) the United States in 1992 agreed under Article 3 of that treaty to not use scientific uncertainty as an excuse for postponing climate change policies, do you believe the United States is now free to ignore this promise by refusing to take action on climate change on the basis of scientific uncerClimate Change (UNFCCC) the United States in 1992 agreed under Article 3 of that treaty to not use scientific uncertainty as an excuse for postponing climate change policies, do you believe the United States is now free to ignore this promise by refusing to take action on climate change on the basis of scientific uncertChange (UNFCCC) the United States in 1992 agreed under Article 3 of that treaty to not use scientific uncertainty as an excuse for postponing climate change policies, do you believe the United States is now free to ignore this promise by refusing to take action on climate change on the basis of scientific uncerclimate change policies, do you believe the United States is now free to ignore this promise by refusing to take action on climate change on the basis of scientific uncertchange policies, do you believe the United States is now free to ignore this promise by refusing to take action on climate change on the basis of scientific uncerclimate change on the basis of scientific uncertchange on the basis of scientific uncertainty?

Given that in ratifying the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) the United States and almost every country in the world in 1992 agreed under Article 3 of that treaty to not use scientific uncertainty as an excuse for postponing climate change policies, do you believe the United States is now free to ignore this promise by refusing to take action on climate change on the basis of scientific uncerClimate Change (UNFCCC) the United States and almost every country in the world in 1992 agreed under Article 3 of that treaty to not use scientific uncertainty as an excuse for postponing climate change policies, do you believe the United States is now free to ignore this promise by refusing to take action on climate change on the basis of scientific uncertChange (UNFCCC) the United States and almost every country in the world in 1992 agreed under Article 3 of that treaty to not use scientific uncertainty as an excuse for postponing climate change policies, do you believe the United States is now free to ignore this promise by refusing to take action on climate change on the basis of scientific uncerclimate change policies, do you believe the United States is now free to ignore this promise by refusing to take action on climate change on the basis of scientific uncertchange policies, do you believe the United States is now free to ignore this promise by refusing to take action on climate change on the basis of scientific uncerclimate change on the basis of scientific uncertchange on the basis of scientific uncertainty?

Just as in the rest of the country, belief in human - caused climate change in Oklahoma has been rising with the thermometer — according to Krosnick, a large majority of Inhofe's constituents now believe that anthropogenic global warming is real.

Now, I don't believe that anthropogenic climate change is an issue of first - order importance since its effects on human life even in the worst - case scenarios are mediated by severe poverty, but suppose that it was and the environmental Cassandra's were right.

Much because of Bernie Sanders, there has been so much talking about climate change in the Democratic primary, and commentators now believe that climate action — unlike in 2008 and 2012 — will become a central part of the election campaign.

Given that in ratifying the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change (UNFCCC) the Untied States in 1992 agreed to the following under Article 3, do you believe the United States is now free to ignore this promise by refusing to take action on climate change on the basis of scientific uncerClimate Change (UNFCCC) the Untied States in 1992 agreed to the following under Article 3, do you believe the United States is now free to ignore this promise by refusing to take action on climate change on the basis of scientific uncertChange (UNFCCC) the Untied States in 1992 agreed to the following under Article 3, do you believe the United States is now free to ignore this promise by refusing to take action on climate change on the basis of scientific uncerclimate change on the basis of scientific uncertchange on the basis of scientific uncertainty?

Women are also more likely than men to believe that climate change is harming people now and that its effects will personally harm them at some point in their lives.

Only in Poland are those on the right more likely to believe that climate change is harming people now.

Respondents were coded as 4 if they believe climate change is a very serious problem; if they think climate change is harming people now; and if they say they are very concerned that climate change will harm them personally at some point in their lifetime.

Gallup and Pew polls show that the percentage of Americans that believe in climate change now hovers around 50 percent, but Krosnick's latest poll — which asked the question in a more detailed way — suggests the figure is 83 percent — up from 79 percent in 1997.

He added that the large majority of governments at the Ministerial segment of the Second Meeting of the Conference of Parties to the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (held in Geneva in June 1996), «while recognizing uncertainties, believe that we know enough to take some actions now,» and that this position was supported by 2000 independent scientists in a letter to President Clinton several weeks ago.

A survey in February by the BBC found that only 26 percent of Britons believed that «climate change is happening and is now established as largely manmade,» down from 41 percent in November 2009.

Stating that nothing major will be detectable within 100 years confirms the bias of those (numerous) persons who believe that climate change is nothing major and that nothing should be done, so let us just make some more research and see how things go in 100 years — whereas producing continuous forecasts from the short - term to long - term should force people to confront the evolution and take decisions now.

The evidence for the seriousness of anthropogenic climate change has been convincing for several decades, is now irrefutable, and the body of evidence is continuously increasing; yet the number of Australians who believe that climate change may not be caused by humanity was around 50 % in early 2010 and was also increasing — due to a disinformation campaign run by the big greenhouse polluters.

The reasons for that are many: the timid language of scientific probabilities, which the climatologist James Hansen once called «scientific reticence» in a paper chastising scientists for editing their own observations so conscientiously that they failed to communicate how dire the threat really was; the fact that the country is dominated by a group of technocrats who believe any problem can be solved and an opposing culture that doesn't even see warming as a problem worth addressing; the way that climate denialism has made scientists even more cautious in offering speculative warnings; the simple speed of change and, also, its slowness, such that we are only seeing effects now of warming from decades past; our uncertainty about uncertainty, which the climate writer Naomi Oreskes in particular has suggested stops us from preparing as though anything worse than a median outcome were even possible; the way we assume climate change will hit hardest elsewhere, not everywhere; the smallness (two degrees) and largeness (1.8 trillion tons) and abstractness (400 parts per million) of the numbers; the discomfort of considering a problem that is very difficult, if not impossible, to solve; the altogether incomprehensible scale of that problem, which amounts to the prospect of our own annihilation; simple fear.

The scientists say that the public has misunderstood the imminent dangers of climate change, believing that it will happen sometime in the future rather than now.

ECO believes that with increasing impacts of climate change around the world, such as the devastating floods in Pakistan earlier this year, it is undeniable that all countries are now vulnerable, even developed countries.

The index combines responses for three survey questions that ask about the extent to which people believe global climate change is a serious problem, is harming people now and will impact them personally at some point in their lives.

Rubio — who expressed deep skepticism about whether man - made activity has played a role in the Earth's changing climate — told Karl he doesn't believe there is action that could be taken right now that would have an impact on what's occurring with our climate.

Leonardo DiCaprio summed that need well in the wake of President Trump's announcement pulling out of the UN's Paris climate agreement: «Now, more than ever, we must be determined to solve climate change, and to challenge those leaders who do not believe in scientific facts or empirical truths.

I would expect to see about one degree C of man - made warming between now and 2100, and believe most of the cries that «we are already seeing catastrophic climate changes» are in fact panics driven by normal natural variation (most supposed trends, say in hurricanes or tornadoes or heat waves, can't actually be found when one looks at the official data).

James Ford, a geographer at McGill University, Canada, believes it is now too late to prevent dangerous climate change in the Arctic.

Meanwhile, as was established in the previous post, there are 10 % fewer cases of malaria — one of the main diseases that the WHO believed to be exacerbated by climate change — now than when the data for the WHO 2002 report was compiled.

The numbers have reversed: only one in three voters (34 per cent) now believe global warming is caused by human activity while almost half (48 per cent) attribute climate change to long - term natural cycles.