Can the hoopla surrounding The Day After Tomorrow actually educate about
the real global warming issue?
Not exact matches
Which Gasoline Corporations Usually do not Use Ethanolthe
real problem with «
global warming» hysteria has caused big
issues in other spots over the boards and perhaps performs into why we have been in Iraq!back again during the eighties the
global warming lunatics released their own individual doctrine which went similar to this.
Actually, it's due to the polls cited in the article — and those I have seen elsewhere — that suggest that the American public thinks, among other things, that scientists are still trying to determine if
global warming is for
real and that it's a major
issue in the upcoming Presidential election.
«The climate change countermovement has had a
real political and ecological impact on the failure of the world to act on the
issue of
global warming,» said Brulle.
Global warming is of course a
real issue (as opposed to alien invasions and meteors hitting the Earth, the chances of which are infinitesimally small).
In response, our design and research team has developed GeoThentic, an online teaching and learning environment for K - 12 geography teachers and students focused on
real - world
issues (e.g.,
global warming), content - specific technologies (Google Earth), and appropriate pedagogies (e.g., problem - based learning), grounded in and designed using the technology, pedagogy, and content knowledge (TPACK) framework.
global warming is a
real issue.
4) Some say that whatever you think about the dangers of
global warming, this kind of language inevitably becomes the
issue, distracts from the
real questions, and could in fact further polarize or paralyze discourse.
It's not the cutting of GHG emissions that are the
real issue: it's the cutting into the 35 % and growing overload of carbon dioxide already on the globe that has to be addressed for getting some control of
global warming.
However, I've never seen a single media article in any U.S. press outlet that covered these
issues — the large - scale evidence for
global warming (melting glaciers,
warming poles, shrinking sea ice, ocean temperatures) to the local scale (more intense hurricanes, more intense precipitation, more frequent droughts and heat waves) while also discussing the
real causes (fossil fuels and deforestation) and the
real solutions (replacement of fossil fuels with renewables, limiting deforestation, and halting the use of fossil fuels, especially coal and oil.)
The emphasis on questionable dollar - cost estimates distracts from the
real issue of
global warming's impact on us.
I accept there is something approaching a scientific consensus that
global warming is
real and should be addressed urgently, but contributions wishing to radically change the figures do need to consider credibility
issues of this kind.
The earth has had significant
Global Warming for some 20,000 years now... The only real argument is to the degree that mans activity has augmented that... We just came out of one - point - five - million years of continuous glaciation with sheets of two mile thick ice down past the 44th parallel... I will cheerfully deal with warming issues over that, any
Warming for some 20,000 years now... The only
real argument is to the degree that mans activity has augmented that... We just came out of one - point - five - million years of continuous glaciation with sheets of two mile thick ice down past the 44th parallel... I will cheerfully deal with
warming issues over that, any
warming issues over that, any day...
«The climate change countermovement has had a
real political and ecological impact on the failure of the world to act on the
issue of
global warming,» said Brulle.
Although
global warming strikes me as one of those
issues where there is no
real balance and it is wrong to create an artificial or false equivalence, there is no harm and some possibility of benefit in inviting skeptics about the human contribution and other factors to speak, but in a setting in which the context of the vast majority of scientific evidence and speakers is also made clear.
I only found out about Ecotricity today, and am shocked (though I shouldn't be) that what's happening here clearly demonstrates that «
global warming» can't be the
real issue, or corporations like EDF would realise that what they are doing ultimately (when actual costs are counted), is increasing their carbon footprint (just think of all the people, documents, transportation that are needed over the course of a court - case).
«I'm convinced that after years of studying the phenomenon,
global warming is not the
real issue of temperature.
Have you considered that the economic risks of drastic carbon cutting and therefore access to cheap energy for developing economies, not to mention distractions from
real and present infrastructure and land - management
issues (a very likely factor in the recent Pakistan floods) under the catch - all label of
global warming, may in fact represent a blind alley that contributes to a fatality risk for many of the world's poorest people of at least an order of magnitude greater than 1 %?
I lost many of the interest in infowars, alex jones and mike adams once i realized mike cut off Dane when he was about to shed light on this
issue... why wouldn't they admit they were wrong with
global warming hoax... this is the
real issue on
global warming!
Barbara Boxer has been a
real leader on
Global Warming issues in the US Senate.
In short, Tol AGREES with the idea at
issue - namely, that an overwhelming number of those in climate science and related fields accept
global warming as
real and occurring.
WND columnist Christopher Monckton, who advised the late British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher on
issues including
global warming, a year ago was in Qatar at a conference on climate change and claimed that the strategies proposed to «solve»
global warming constitute the
real «menace» to democracy.
[¶] The academies of science of the following 33 nations or regions have
issued statements accepting
global warming as
real and human - caused: [lists] He is correct in his hypothesis, AGW is a hoax, and in his conclusion, it is unparalleled.
A panel of top American scientists declared today that
global warming was a
real problem and was getting worse, a conclusion that may lead President Bush to change his stand on the
issue as he heads next week to Europe, where the United States is seen as a major source of the air pollution held responsible for climate change.
The fact that there is no valid evidence that
global warming would be net damaging is the
real issue.
We also know that the
global warming issue resulted in incalculable intellectual fraud, grotesque corporate rent - seeking, and the waste of the environmental dollar (there are
real, here - and - now ecological
issues that deserve the
global warming buck).
With the world economy in shambles, and nearly all national governments awash in debt, there is diminishing incentive for politicians to spend scarce public funds on the much - hyped hypothetical future «threats» posed by
global warming — especially when there are very
real, tangible
issues demanding immediate attention and funding.
An executive (and founder) with Green Peace recently admitted he left the organization because
global warming was more of a political
issue than reality and the «scientific» models being developed were designed to back up
global warming assertions instead of to process
real data in unbiased fashion.
Surprisingly, the statement by the sixteen scientists that «CO2 is not a pollutant» is defended by reference to a common dictionary rather than to a scientific source.d But in the end they agree that the
real issue is whether this «component» will «cause significant and destructive
global warming.»
We consider such references to be the
real «rhetorical devices» because they obscure the key scientific
issue: whether this critical component of the earth's biosphere will cause significant and destructive
global warming.
Several commenters pointed me to an interesting blog,
Real Climate, which seemed to be a reasonable treatment of
issues written by those who generally accept the orthodox view of man - made
global warming.
It's to get off
real dealing with problems that have very serious dangers and consequences and moving to this kind of feel - good
issue of
global warming.»
Turner Construction Even the chance that [
global warming] is a
real issue should motivate each and every one of us to action,» 1 — Thomas Leppert, CEO; Goldman Sachs «We support the need for a national policy to limit greenhouse gas emissions» - Environmental Policy Framework JPMorgan Chase «JPMorgan Chase advocates the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions.»
Let's examine the
real issues: (1) Did anthropogenic
global warming cause the extraordinary increase in surface melting between July 8 and July 12?
Expect the comments below to be filled with changing goalposts, poisoning of the well (something along the lines of «scientists shouldn't be investigating scientists», even though what they were investigating was Dr. Mann's scientific conduct), distractions, diversions, and just general noise — anything to bury the cold fact that the scientists involved with modeling
global warming did not cheat, did not fake any data, and the bigger
issue that climate change is
real.
The answer to this problem, which is a
real one, since many reporters are newbies or don't know the science they are reporting on and are just looking for a few good quotes to bolster their reportagel, is this: scientists who understand the
issue of
global warming and climate change need to write more oped commentaries for major newspapers like the NY Times and the LA Times and the Guardian, with their names attached as author, and get the truth out that way.
But if he subsequently took time to read my material after replying to my comment at his article, then it's plausible he's not only realized that this grandiose dream has evaporated, but also that he's now facing the far more
real and very bleak prospect of trying to guess who might turn state's evidence against him just to save their own skins in investigations of where the actual «racketeering» in the
global warming issue seemingly appears.