Sentences with phrase «problems believe in climate change»

Not exact matches

Despite countless findings to the contrary, a large portion of the population doesn't believe that scientists agree on the existence of human - caused climate change, which affects their willingness to seek a solution to the problem, according to a 2011 study in Nature Climate climate change, which affects their willingness to seek a solution to the problem, according to a 2011 study in Nature Climate Cchange, which affects their willingness to seek a solution to the problem, according to a 2011 study in Nature Climate Climate ChangeChange.

«So far, I believe the benefits (of Arctic warming) outweigh the potential problems,» said Oleg Anisimov, a Russian scientist who co-authored a chapter about the impacts of climate change in polar regions for a U.N. report on global warming this year.

But the AGU believes that a broader solution is needed, which is why the statement calls on members to become more involved not only in researching the problem but also spreading the word about the urgency of controlling climate change, something many scientists have been loathe to do in the past, Killeen admits.

Citing polls showing that the majority of the U.S. public does believe that climate change is taking place, Holdren said the real problem is that the issue isn't as urgent as other concerns that many people have: «We need to be more in the business of persuading people this needs to be higher on their priority list.»

Nate conflates problems of prediction in the realm of human behavior — where there are no fundamental governing «laws» and any «predictions» are potentially laden with subjective and untestable assumptions — with problems such as climate change, which are governed by laws of physics, like the greenhouse effect, that are true whether or not you choose to believe them.»

But please do not interpret my silence on climate change as a statement that I do not believe in it, or that it is a serious problem.

a) they don't believe the premise of man - made climate change: they don't think scientific data collected to date is adequate to prove conclusively that any type of man - made event can result in either the recent fluxuations in climate or the anticipated kinds of drastic climate change, therefore CO2 control would be ineffective at solving the problem b) they don't believe CO2 alone is responsible: they think other variables are as or more likely to be the catalysts or causes for the scientific data collected to date on climate change therefore CO2 control would be ineffective at solving the problem c) they believe government efforts to curb CO2 emissions will fail resulting in an unprecedented waste of money and worse economic conditions.

One runs the risk of being labelled a climate sceptic who doesn't believe in the seriousness of the climate change problem, or of being somehow «anti-science» in general.

In the early 1990s, a group of sceptics claimed that Roger Revelle, one of the first climate scientists, had changed his mind about global warming and no longer believed it was a serious problem.

The clash between Neste and Greenpeace highlights one of the key ideological debates over climate change: Business and politicians believe that a «technological» fix such as alternative fuels can solve the problem and also generate profits; many environmental groups believe the real solution to global warming lies in reducing consumption.

«Perhaps the most interesting finding in this poll, aside from the precipitous drop in the number of Independents who believe global warming is a problem, is that the more Americans learn about cap - and - trade, the more they oppose cap - and - trade,» says Sen. James Inhofe (R., Okla.), a longtime skeptic of climate - change warnings.

New Zealand believes that problems arising from the effects on whales of persistent organic pollutants, heavy metals, climate change and ozone depletion must be confronted in appropriate international forums.

If Obama takes the position that legislation can be negotiated without regard to whether its supporters believe in the scientific evidence or not, if he brings to the bully pulpit no serious vocabulary on climate change, no gravitas on climate science, then how likely is it that he will lead government and society to deal with the problem in a «comprehensive» way?

The three Abrahamic faiths will discuss each of their faith's views about protecting the Earth, caring for the environment and being proactive in combating climate change, which many believe is Earth's biggest problem.

One - in - three voters (33 %) believe climate change is not a serious problem....»

This organizational structure and purpose stand in contrast to those of the United Nations» Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), which is government - sponsored, politically motivated, and predisposed to believing that climate change is a problem in need of a U.N. soClimate Change (IPCC), which is government - sponsored, politically motivated, and predisposed to believing that climate change is a problem in need of a U.N. solChange (IPCC), which is government - sponsored, politically motivated, and predisposed to believing that climate change is a problem in need of a U.N. soclimate change is a problem in need of a U.N. solchange is a problem in need of a U.N. solution.

In fact, 7 out of 8 Republican candidates for the US presidency proclaimed they didn't believe that climate change was a problem.

«The president had made clear when he was a candidate that he did not believe the Kyoto Protocol addressed the problem of climate change in a way that the United States could support,» she said.

In the U.S., 45 % believe global climate change is a very serious problem.

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.

On the other hand people like Judith because, while she believes in climate change, she doesn't have a problem calling the team out on «hide the decline» or Lonnie on his missing ice cores.

In one chapter, Lomborg suggested that while he believed that climate change was real, he doubted the extreme temperature predictions, and claimed that his own cost - benefit analysis indicated that it was not the most pressing problem facing the world compared to poverty, disease and global development.

For instance, in Nisbet's typology, «ecological activists» such as Bill McKibben and Naomi Klein frame climate change as a product of the global capitalist system, «smart growth reformers» such as Al Gore and Nicholas Stern diagnose climate change as a market failure that can be corrected with more efficient price signals, and «ecomodernists» such as Ted Nordhaus and Michael Shellenberger believe climate change has been misdiagnosed as an environmental problem and should be reframed as a resilience and innovation challenge.

... If you believe that solving the climate change problem «is fundamentally a technological challenge,» then we are in this mess not because of the power of the fossil fuel lobby, not because of the influence of the campaign of denial, not because of money politics, not because persuading consumers to accept a price on carbon seems too hard, and not because getting international cooperation has been fraught.

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 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.

We are supposed to believe their declaration of a global climate catastrophe based on trivial changes in world temps, while ignoring the evidence that their claims lack actual data and that their cures are far worse than the potential problem.

The first time you hear that climate change is this amazingly huge problem, many people, it seems to me, go through the five stages of grief: It's: «I don't believe you, that's ridiculous» — you're in denial.

When asked whether climate change is a serious problem, 69 percent of respondents believed in 2014, but the 2015 results showed only 63 percent think the same way in 2015.

Again, this isn't a throw - all - the - money - in - the - world - at - nuclear - R & D argument, mainly because I don't believe the premises of GAP, that climate change is the urgent problem that Stern et al have claimed.