Sentences with phrase «other climate scientists try»

Hansen, noted for his outspokenness on the topic of climate change and his willingness to venture into an advocacy role that many other climate scientists try to avoid, has previously voiced his concern about the 2 - degree warming benchmark, saying in 2011 at the annual meeting of the American Geophysical Union (AGU) that, «the target that has been talked about in international negotiations for 2 degrees of warming is actually a prescription for long - term disaster.»

Not exact matches

There are many honest, hardworking climate scientists who are trying to understand the effects of CO2 on climate, but their work has fallen under suspicion because of the hockey - stick scandal and many other exaggerations about the dangers of increasing CO2.

He and other report authors noted that scientists trying to face threats such as global climate change and the preservation of biodiversity face unwanted input from special interest groups and political impedance, and countries that might be unequally affected by these threats have vastly different ideas of how to handle them.

Now, if by impacts, he means the impacts to ecosystems, etc., it seems unlikely that climate scientists jockeying for funding would be trying to change the topic of interest from climate science to these other fields (which I guess gets back to your point that funding self - interest would dictate continuing to emphasize uncertainty).

«This was an effort to try and refine our understanding of the causes, or trends and variations, in the climate of the Eastern Pacific and West Coast states,» said Nate Mantua, now a NOAA fisheries scientist, the other author of the newly published paper.

It would be an interesting exercise to select a sufficient number for statistical significance of random papers in other fields of science, and try to recreate their results based on publicly available data, and compare that against the allegations against climate scientists.

Watch the first 1 to 2 minutes section of the UP Stream Pt 4 doco / research prject specifically being directed at all Climate Scientists about how important Values are, and why Listening to the community (the target market) is absolutely critical: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iyRKTqsXfjM Watch how people (the general public) are treated by others (climate scientists included) on all climate blogs when they indicate they are not yet convinced of AGW or can't work out who to believe is telling the truth and in doing so reference someone else's «opinion»... and try and measure the level of paranoia exhibited by pro-agw folks about such negative comments about the sClimate Scientists about how important Values are, and why Listening to the community (the target market) is absolutely critical: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iyRKTqsXfjM Watch how people (the general public) are treated by others (climate scientists included) on all climate blogs when they indicate they are not yet convinced of AGW or can't work out who to believe is telling the truth and in doing so reference someone else's «opinion»... and try and measure the level of paranoia exhibited by pro-agw folks about such negative comments about thScientists about how important Values are, and why Listening to the community (the target market) is absolutely critical: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iyRKTqsXfjM Watch how people (the general public) are treated by others (climate scientists included) on all climate blogs when they indicate they are not yet convinced of AGW or can't work out who to believe is telling the truth and in doing so reference someone else's «opinion»... and try and measure the level of paranoia exhibited by pro-agw folks about such negative comments about the sclimate scientists included) on all climate blogs when they indicate they are not yet convinced of AGW or can't work out who to believe is telling the truth and in doing so reference someone else's «opinion»... and try and measure the level of paranoia exhibited by pro-agw folks about such negative comments about thscientists included) on all climate blogs when they indicate they are not yet convinced of AGW or can't work out who to believe is telling the truth and in doing so reference someone else's «opinion»... and try and measure the level of paranoia exhibited by pro-agw folks about such negative comments about the sclimate blogs when they indicate they are not yet convinced of AGW or can't work out who to believe is telling the truth and in doing so reference someone else's «opinion»... and try and measure the level of paranoia exhibited by pro-agw folks about such negative comments about the science.

The run - up in climate science funding is rather modest compared to other areas of science funding, and a more reasonable interpretation of the funding picture isn't that climate scientists are trying to act alarmed in order to run up their funding, but rather that they (we) are trying to run up funding because they actually are alarmed and feel that the subject needs to be understood better.

And on the other hand we have a growing band of so - called amateur scientists, who have firstly taken it upon themselves to challenge this consensus, and secondly learn, or claim they have learnt, about climate science in order to try to acquire some credentials.

Obviously there is, but as I tried to say before, there are probably a million different ways you could go about calculating a «global temperature» and some climate scientists (with possible financial encouragement from ExxonMobil or others intent on creating uncertainly as a stalling tactic) have apparently found a few of those million ways that don't happen to show much increase in temperature.

And in addition, think about all the wasted energy the «climate community» spent mitigating the impact of «deniers,» when «skeptics» could have helped out by listening more carefully to the «climate community,» and trying to understand «the climate community's» arguments, and adding to progress on increasing our understanding of the causes of climate variability and change — rather than apologizing or ignoring the input from scientists like Fred Singer — who deliberately lifts a conditional clause from a larger sentence, divorces it completely from context, and creates a fraudulent quotation in order to deliberately deceive, or Ross McKitrick who slanders other scientists on purely speculative conclusions about their motivations, or guest - posters at WUWT who call BEST «media whores,» or the long line of denizens at Climate Etc. who falsely claim that the «climate community» ignores all uncertainties towards the goal of serving a socialist, eco-Nazi agenda to destroy capiclimate community» spent mitigating the impact of «deniers,» when «skeptics» could have helped out by listening more carefully to the «climate community,» and trying to understand «the climate community's» arguments, and adding to progress on increasing our understanding of the causes of climate variability and change — rather than apologizing or ignoring the input from scientists like Fred Singer — who deliberately lifts a conditional clause from a larger sentence, divorces it completely from context, and creates a fraudulent quotation in order to deliberately deceive, or Ross McKitrick who slanders other scientists on purely speculative conclusions about their motivations, or guest - posters at WUWT who call BEST «media whores,» or the long line of denizens at Climate Etc. who falsely claim that the «climate community» ignores all uncertainties towards the goal of serving a socialist, eco-Nazi agenda to destroy capiclimate community,» and trying to understand «the climate community's» arguments, and adding to progress on increasing our understanding of the causes of climate variability and change — rather than apologizing or ignoring the input from scientists like Fred Singer — who deliberately lifts a conditional clause from a larger sentence, divorces it completely from context, and creates a fraudulent quotation in order to deliberately deceive, or Ross McKitrick who slanders other scientists on purely speculative conclusions about their motivations, or guest - posters at WUWT who call BEST «media whores,» or the long line of denizens at Climate Etc. who falsely claim that the «climate community» ignores all uncertainties towards the goal of serving a socialist, eco-Nazi agenda to destroy capiclimate community's» arguments, and adding to progress on increasing our understanding of the causes of climate variability and change — rather than apologizing or ignoring the input from scientists like Fred Singer — who deliberately lifts a conditional clause from a larger sentence, divorces it completely from context, and creates a fraudulent quotation in order to deliberately deceive, or Ross McKitrick who slanders other scientists on purely speculative conclusions about their motivations, or guest - posters at WUWT who call BEST «media whores,» or the long line of denizens at Climate Etc. who falsely claim that the «climate community» ignores all uncertainties towards the goal of serving a socialist, eco-Nazi agenda to destroy capiclimate variability and change — rather than apologizing or ignoring the input from scientists like Fred Singer — who deliberately lifts a conditional clause from a larger sentence, divorces it completely from context, and creates a fraudulent quotation in order to deliberately deceive, or Ross McKitrick who slanders other scientists on purely speculative conclusions about their motivations, or guest - posters at WUWT who call BEST «media whores,» or the long line of denizens at Climate Etc. who falsely claim that the «climate community» ignores all uncertainties towards the goal of serving a socialist, eco-Nazi agenda to destroy capiClimate Etc. who falsely claim that the «climate community» ignores all uncertainties towards the goal of serving a socialist, eco-Nazi agenda to destroy capiclimate community» ignores all uncertainties towards the goal of serving a socialist, eco-Nazi agenda to destroy capitalism.

FWIW — many «skeptics» claim that mechanism doesn't explain how most «skeptics» formulate their views on climate change — but they think other mechanisms are explanatory, such as a common sense insight that climate scientists are trying to bamboozle them.

But after trying to follow EO's numerous claims about climate, in the particular case of (ii) at hand I have serious doubts as to whether climate scientists have anything at all to learn from rocket engineers other than that the latter should stick to rocket engineering.

The jurors may well be so indoctrinated with the orthodoxy of climate change that any suggestion that Mann is anything other than a great scientist trying to save the planet will fall on deaf ears and no amount of evidence or appeal to reason will shake them of the notion.

«This was an effort to try and refine our understanding of the causes, or trends and variations, in the climate of the Eastern Pacific and West Coast states,» said Nate Mantua, now a NOAA fisheries scientist, the other author of the newly published paper.

In addition, the findings have obvious implications for climate scientists and others who are trying to influence public opinion.

It doesn't make any sense from a climate point of view, which is what I [and other scientists] were trying to say.

i think that's inaccurate shx, the scientists did their work, and from what i could gather tried very hard not to overstate their case, the media did the scare - mongering and the media have then turned like the whores they are in the other direction, al gore's film upped the tempo and although it seemed like a good thing at the time, i think with hindsight it was a poisoned chalice, but lets be clear, doing research in multiple areas and having the results point to potentially catastrophic climate change and asking for changes to be made to avert this is not scare - mongering, its common sense, accepting that their is margin for error but erring on the side of caution since the stakes are life on earth as we know it is not scare - mongering, it is the application of the precautionary principle and common sense

The relevance of your point is that sometimes activist climate scientists try to to hijack the scientific, rhetorical, and policy successes of biologists and other scientists.

Ben Kirtman, a climate scientist at the University of Miami and a lead author of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change's latest assessment, said he and other scientists have tried talking to politicians in Florida about these risks, including both Scott and Rubio, who is a possible presidential contender iclimate scientist at the University of Miami and a lead author of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change's latest assessment, said he and other scientists have tried talking to politicians in Florida about these risks, including both Scott and Rubio, who is a possible presidential contender iClimate Change's latest assessment, said he and other scientists have tried talking to politicians in Florida about these risks, including both Scott and Rubio, who is a possible presidential contender in 2016.

Lomborg, whose 2001 book suggested the planet should adapt to global warming rather than wasting resources trying to prevent it, has made his name by accusing scientists and others of exaggerating the extent and effects of climate change.

You mean like «there was no Gulf of Tonkin incident» or «the Lusatania was carrying Arms & Ammunition» or «critical information was witheld from the commanders at Pearl Harbor» or «19 men armed with box - cutters hijacked 4 airplanes on 9/11/2001» or «the woman attesting to Iraqi atrocities against Kuwait was the daughter of a Kuwati diplomat» or «some Germans tried to assassinate Hitler in 1944» or «insider climate scientists communicated with each other to help obstruct the publication of papers skeptical of CAGW»

«When even genuine climate scientists can not get a short article published, that tries make other climate scientists aware of data that might have a slightly negative effect on AGW theory»

I completely agree, and have said so on this blog, that Judith has to tread softly because she is a respected climate scientist, and is still trying to reach out to those other scientists who have been caught up in the paradigm paralysis she speaks of.

When even genuine climate scientists can not get a short article published, that tries make other climate scientists aware of data that might have a slightly negative effect on AGW theory (as in the CO2 warming might not be as bad as predicted by climate models), well, you know for certain that climate science is no - longer functioning as a science.

The chief scientist said Mr. Daboub, who oversees the sustainable development division of the bank, tried to take out some references to climate change completely and, in other cases, replaced it with the phrases «climate risk» and «climate variability», which convey greater uncertainty over the human impact on climate.

That's in part because the primary pollutant from natural gas, methane, is far more potent than other greenhouse gases, and scientists are still trying to understand its effect on the climate — and because it continues to be difficult to measure exactly how much methane is being emitted.

In the next few days, the jury who will decide the fate of one of the UK's most prominent climate scientists will take their places... There are three clear charges: that Prof Jones and others tried to subvert the scientific peer - review process; that he attempted to conceal data that others requested; and that some data were manipulated.

Overall, I think if statisticians can work together with climate scientists, rather than trying to refute each others work, that we could benefit from better and more realistic temperature reconstructions.

«Because grassland ecosystems are the most vulnerable to extreme climate events, we examined data collected by many other scientists to try and understand the relationship between rain events and drought on the potential productivity of grasslands,» said Chuixiang Yi of City University of New York.