Sentences with phrase «related science points»

During the deposition process of Dr Singer (full text here), Lancaster acted as his own attorney, posing most of his questions on the Revelle - Singer - Starr paper and related science points, but closed with questions about skeptic climate scientists and Western Fuels» funding of them.

Not exact matches

How you can even relate science and worshiping idols together in the same point, boggles the mind.

In my view, the most important omission related directly to science and technology aspects of the greenhouse gas issue is the failure to point out the tremendous opportunity that exists to limit warming over the next few decades by imposing strong, mandatory controls of short - lived warming agents (so methane, black carbon, and tropospheric ozone).

Each film serves as a jumping off point for the speaker to explore a related science or technology topic in a way that engages popular culture audiences.

The government pointed to PISA data that showed more than a quarter of pupils (28 per cent) in England hope to be working in a science - related career by the time they are 30, a «significant increase» compared to 16 % in 2006.

175 years after the invention of photography, the extensive two - part exhibition presents a somewhat different history of the medium: rather than focusing on technical, sociological aspects or those related to media science and art history, it tells the story of photography from the point of view of artists.

My comments about «my links» was not about you personally, more a general point about where I sit, and the endless criticisms sharing important related info / science that flies right over the top of peoples heads, especially intelligent PhDs who can not see the wood for the trees and have little holistic vision (imho).

I've written in the past about other issues related to setting a numerical limit for climate dangers given both the enduring uncertainty around the most important climate change questions and the big body of science pointing to a gradient of risks rising with temperature.

This page is a catalogue that will be kept up to date pointing to selected sources of code and data related to climate science.

Congressman Holt raises a number of key questions on related issues, while pointing to some very hopeful experiences, notably in the Apollo program, in his 16 September editorial in Science.

I notice that it took me, an amateur with no professional qualifications directly related to climate science, only moments to independently identify multiple weaknesses in the questions, the same weaknesses that other commenters have pointed out.

On bad media: There has been plenty of misinformation and / or disinformation on climate disseminated by the media over the years — much of it related to the AGW point above (conflating all climate science with flawed examples, or mashing up meanings).

But while science advances through that process of argument, public attitudes on climate change have largely been dulled by the debate, particularly after more than a decade of industry - backed efforts to point to the implicit complexity in the science as a reason for inaction on related energy and climate policies.

There are other important questions about the path forward, related to how to handle reasoned minority views on particular science and policy questions, how to deal speedily with errors and how to break down barriers among the three main «working groups» — on the basic science pointing to warming, the range of impacts and possible responses.

Related IPCC Climate Change Report The Five Key Points IPCC Report: Climate Change 2013: The Physical Science Basis IPCC Report: Climate Change 2014: Impacts, Adaptation, and Vulnerability New York Times: Climate Study Puts Diplomatic Pressure on Obama

We seem, however, to agree on very many points related to the nature of science as well as on what kind of requirements should be made on scientific practices.

Furthermore, I pointed out how this was closely related to what I take to be a central principle explaining the power of science:

In one of my other recent articles, I describe how the PBS NewsHour's 1996 - to - present bias in its global warming discussion segments presents only four instances where any semblance of skeptic science points were mentioned out of more than 355 on - air broadcast discussions (plus a few online pages directly relating to some of those segments).

The point of origin in this discussion was the article that illustrates an influence of «solution aversion» to how people assess the science related to climate change.

Finally, you may also find quite interesting the concluding Amicus section that points out the numerous science - related legal errors the EPA committed which taken together all but guaranteed that its EF - related analytical process was grossly flawed.

I forgot to mention that on the «science denial kills» question, while others have already pointed out how laughably bogus the «Global Warming is killing people» claim is, we might also mention that when the globe cools, (and when people don't have access to low cost energy for warmth), the associated crop failures, disease, starvation, and cold related deaths, number in the millions annually as history has amply demonstrated.

And that's illustrated if you compare how «science - based» and «science - denier» blogs discuss right about any climate - related topic, from actual atmospheric temperature development to its physical manifestations, like sea level rise (see the chart in the middle of this piece) and social and ecological consequences of climate change — including at some point the fate of iconic mammal species that use sea ice as hunting grounds.

assuming what you say about skeptics changing topic as you describe is accurate, and at this point I do we are talking about data that is less than 200 years old, out of which extraordinary claims are made as to how that data relates to distant past and future trends tough sell assuming that all adjustments to the data are scientifically sound, It is very difficult for me to believe that measurements that have gone through so many iterations can be trusted to.0 and.00 in most other sciences, I doubt they would tough sell (the photo of the thermometer is downright funny) in terms of goal post moving I observe predicted heat being re-branded as «missing» a prediction of no snow re-branded as more snow a warming world re-branded to a «warm, cold, we don't know what to expect» world topped off with suggestions that one who thinks the above has some sort of psychological disorder extraordinary claims demand extraordinary evidence especially when you are teaching children that their world is endangered

On the one hand, warnings from the scientific community are becoming louder, as an increasing body of science points to rising dangers from the ongoing buildup of human - related greenhouse gases — produced mainly by the burning of fossil fuels and forests.

As coby has pointed out on other sections of his blog, the confluence of science from a wide variety of areas that has led to almost every real scientist in fields related to climate science (and especially those in climate science itself) accepting the basic tenets of anthropenically induced global climate change.

I have done so repeatedly — to the point that the moderators of this site have had to remind me that it is a climate science blog, not an energy and efficiency technology blog, and that the comment threads are a forum for discussing climate science, and not a forum for discussing or debating the merits of different approaches to phasing out energy - related GHG emissions.