Sentences with phrase «other than global warming»

We do have a limited quantity of fossil fuels available, and pollution is a problem for reasons other than Global Warming.

I am merely pointing out that real denial, of humanity, is something other than global warming denial.

Marine protected areas are under siege by no other than global warming.

This is your hardest question to answer, as the question seems to presuppose their are other sources of heat that are warming up the earth other than global warming due to CO2, methane, nitrous oxide (from agriculture and fertilisers) and CFCs (chlorofluorocarbons, from refrigerants etc) accumulating in the atmosphere from mankind's various activities.

Not exact matches

You likely deny evolution and global warming for no other reason than it makes you uncomfortable and hold science to the impossibly high standard of having to explain every conceivable mystery about the natural World before you will accept it, but some moron at a pulpit doing magic hand signals of a Sundaymorning is enough to convince you he is communicating with some sky - god and turning grocery store bread and wine into flesh and blood.

Atheist believe in nothing but they still exist, Most Atheist believe in Global Warming, Our EPA regulations, laws are higher than any other country, just implement's the laws on the books and we will be fine.

You likely deny global warming for no other reason than it makes you uncomfortable and hold science to the impossibly high standard of having to explain every conceivable mystery about the natural World before you will accept it, but some moron rolling around a floor speaking in tongues is enough to convince you he is channeling a spirit.

However, the recent period of cooling does suggest that either manmade global warming may be smaller or that the impact of other factors may be greater than climate models have so far assumed.

Not to worry though, because what chance is there that our scientific study results could even be related to foreign relations, other than, you know, research on global warming or acid rain or fish populations or avian - flu transmission or mad - cow - disease transmission, or ozone depletion or....

By reconstructing past global warming and the carbon cycle on Earth 56 million years ago, researchers from the Niels Bohr Institute among others have used computer modelling to estimate the potential perspective for future global warming, which could be even warmer than previously thought.

A short list of relatively simple actions taken to reduce greenhouse gases other than CO2 could help put the brakes on global warming — if implemented globally

The research suggests that — contrary to some prior findings — CO2 led the prior round of global warming rather than vice versa, just as it continues to do today thanks to rising emissions of CO2 and other greenhouse gases.

For example, Konisky's analysis of the survey responses from 1990 through 2015 indicates that Christians, compared to atheists, agnostics and individuals who do not affiliate with a religion, are less likely to prioritize environmental protection over economic growth, and they are more likely than others to believe global warming is exaggerated.

Garrett says that, based on other historical records, particulate pollution seems to be following a different path than carbon dioxide, the principal suspect in global warming.

Global warming may prove worse for insects — and other cold - blooded critters — living in the steamy tropics than for their counterparts living closer to the frigid polar regions, according to a new study in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA.

The body of several thousand atmospheric scientists, climatologists, glaciologists, oceanographers and other scientists, hailing from 154 countries, are more certain than ever that humanity is to blame for global warming, which may be linked to odd events like trees blossoming in the Luxembourg Garden here in the middle of winter.

In other words, global warming could be rather worse than we think it will be, because of the way in which ecosystems respond.»

Put the other way round, two or three warmer winters in a row could be due to unforced variability rather than global warming, just as two or three high scores in pinball do not necessarily mean the table is tilted.

The process also creates tiny bits of soot, called black carbon, and traces of harmful substances, known as brown carbon, which together cause more global warming per unit weight than other human - associated carbon sources.

I can understand that approaching equilibrium takes a long, long time, while TCR gives a better measure of what will happen over the next few decades (and that technology and society may be very different in 200 years time); but on the other hand, I thought nations had agreed to try to limit global warming to less than 2 degrees C overall, and not just to limit it to less than 2 degrees C by 2100.

From an instantaneous doubling of atmospheric CO2 content from the pre-industrial base level, some models would project 2 °C (3.6 °F) of global warming in less than a decade while others would project that it would take more than a century to achieve that much warming.

What's worse is that the budget may even be smaller since emissions other than CO2 also contribute to global warming.

Rather, «land surface warming» is one of more than ten bricks supporting «global warming»; and with global warming established, there is a whole other set of bricks supporting «anthropogenic global warming».

And it's heading into dire waters as global warming heats up the waters along this part of the North American coastline some 99.9 % times more rapidly than any other ocean is currently experiencing.

«Winters in Finland were getting warmer every year but other than that, I felt like the global warming didn't really affect me,» writes Reetta Heiskanen.

[ANDY REVKIN responds: I daresay I've brought Dr. Hansen's research and conclusions as much or more publicity over the course of his career than any other science writer, starting with a 6,000 - word cover story on global warming in Discover Magazine in 1988 that opened with his Senate testimony and continuing through the period when political appointees at NASA tried to stop him from speaking out.

Essentially, all they said is that they acknowledge that global warming is due to unspecified human activities, that it will have ecological consequences (no mention of economic consequences, other than the insinuation that taking action of global warming might threaten economic growth), and that coordinated global action is required, but that economic growth and energy security must be taken into account, and that they'll meet to talk about it again.

b) There is some other mechanism of producing global warming that has been active in the past, but occurs by a mechanism that is not included in current models, and which doesn't have anything to do with CO2, and this, rather than CO2, is responsible for the warming seen in the instrumental record (and whatever that mechanism is, it is temporary and will go away by itself Real Soon Now).

The prime goal of this new regime must be to limit global warming to no more than 2 ºC above the pre-industrial temperature, a limit that has already been formally adopted by the European Union and a number of other countries.

That's certainly what one expects in he majority of local climatologies in a warming world, although of course the local response to global warming will be larger in some areas than other and etc...

Do you really think the fact that waters are warmer and atmospheric moisture content is higher now due to man - made global warming (not to mention the «blocking high» over Greenland due to Arctic climate change) may be less of an influence on Hurricane Sandy than some other currently unobserved changes to our climate that occurred 3000 years ago?

Local anomalies can be much larger than the global anomaly because some places are warming more than others as everyone knows.

It may benefit your comprehension of this global warming event if you examine it from a perspective of forcing components and influences, rather than merely hey some data fits some other data.

due to co2 we are already living in a greenhouse.Whatever one does in that greenhouse will remain in the greenhouse.INDUSTRIOUS HEAT will remain in the greenhouse instead of escaping into outer space; this is a far greater contributor to global warming than other factors and far more difficult to reduce without reducing economic activity.Like warm moist air from your mouth on cold mornings so melting antarctic ice will turn into cloud as it meets warm moist air from tropics the seas will not rise as antarctica is a huge cloud generator.A thick band of cloud around the earth will produce even temps accross the whole earth causing the wind to moderate even stop.WE should be preparing for this possible scenario»

(This is why it is not good enough, on this particular issue, if the Times's coverage of global warming is «better than» that of other papers and other media.

There are other highly uncertain topics such as hurricanes and global warming and cloud / aerosol feedbacks, that are arguably more important for the global warming argument than the paleo reconstructions.

I see Victor still can not comprehend the difference between a modern day satelite temperature record and all the others... that rather than undermine the previous data sets showing / proving / emphasising / projecting further global warming that them there satelite data actually confirms it.

The evidence that global warming is occurring, and furthermore is due in large part to human influences (though perhaps other factors also play a role), is much stronger than the evidence I have personally seen that Inhofe exists.

In other words, a DO event (brought on this time by anthropogenic global warming) should be seen as larger and more rapid climate change than anthropogenic global warming.

can see no other reasonable interpretation of these statements than that the scientists believe their experiments show we're in much more trouble over global warming than previously thought

Other than that, there is «Some skeptics, however, have suggested that the rise in global temperatures has actually slowed since 1998, which was itself a record - warm year.»

It also doesn't help that there are almost no grass roots mobilization efforts being carried out by national environmental groups over the issue of global warming other than 350.org.

The war against global warming, hunger and despair will be won by the good people of the world because there are more of us than the other kind.

I know some here will decry that I am not talking about the issues because I do not try to obsfuscate with a discussion of the spot market price of coal vs long - term contracts, or use of coal in locations other than Kansas, or Al Gore's footprint, but the issue of Global Warming IS politics (non-ratification of Kyoto and negative flag - waving ads about politicians who oppose coal), it IS public relations («Clean Coal», cleanest coal - fired plants, surface mining and mountain - top reoval rather than strip mining, etc.), and it IS about misrepresentation (Peobody framing the debate as coal vs NG when it is really coal vs every other energy source), and it IS about greed (the coal industry doing everything it can to scuttle every other energy alternative).

Even so this omits gases other than CO2 which are responsible for about half of human cause global warming.

Some issue advocates have argued that the term climate change is more likely to engage Republicans in the issue, however, the evidence from these studies suggests that in general the terms are synonymous for Republicans — i.e., neither term is more engaging than the other, although in several cases, global warming generates stronger feelings of negative affect and stronger perceptions of personal and familial threat among Republicans; they are also more likely to believe that global warming is already affecting weather in the United States.

And half of them don't even know that there's anything more than carbon involved in global warming while the other half are only there to party or are remnants of the New Age movement.

Tea Party members are much more likely to say that they are «very well informed» about global warming than the other groups.

And if these policies were actually discussed publicly in that way (as being beneficial for many reasons other than mitigating global warming) perhaps we'd get out of the trap that Michael Crichton and his ilk continue to set for us.

That said (and I would imagine that you know this is coming), the task for journalism on this particular issue, i.e., global warming, is not merely to get the award, be better than the others, or work for a paper that's considered to be a leader.