Sentences with phrase «scientific debates over global warming»

A climate researcher for decades, he had long been in the midst of political and scientific debates over global warming, tirelessly urging political leaders and the public to take action now to avoid disasters such as rising sea levels in the future.

Not exact matches

Dr. Hayhoe is the co-author of the book A Climate for Change: Global Warming Facts for Faith - Based Decisions and describes herself as «a spokesperson with one principal goal — to bring public awareness to the simple truth that the scientific debate is over, and now it's time for all of us to take action.»

There is no real debate in the peer - reviewed scientific literature over the fact that the unusual, accelerating global warming seen since the 19th Century is attributable to the increase of greenhouse gases, primarily carbon dioxide, in the atmosphere due to burning fossil fuels.

By focusing on the consequences of climate change rather than its scientific causes, some experts suggest that Mr. Nash succeeded in circumventing a divisive political debate over global warming and the extent to which human activity contributes to it.

What is often forgotten is that the UN established the IPCC in 1988 only because of the then raging scientific debate over the veracity of the anthropogenic global warming hypothesis.

Nonetheless, both of these potential problems are in keeping with the main point of this essay, which is that the science is not «settled» and there is actually quite a lot of debate over man - made global warming theory within the scientific community.

The truth is a vigorous global scientific debate persists over whether man's use of carbon - based fuels threatens to cause catastrophic global warming, and the media not reporting that is not performing journalism.

And yet the same kind of unhinged repudiation of an overwhelming body of scientific facts is treated not as the private obsession of a handful of nutcases, but as a legitimate part of the «debate» over global warming.

One is that it will simply intensify the political, ideological and, yes, moral debate that has erupted over who does and does not believe we are causing global warming, and thus move us even farther from the important scientific effort that the issue deserves.

The petition demonstrates beyond doubt that the scientific debate is not over and suggests instead that most scientists do not believe global warming is a crisis.

The phrase «the debate over global warming is now over» does not mean that there is no more to learn scientifically, as Lindzen's comment suggests, but that theoretical analyses combined with observational evidence have together produced a broad scientific consensus that human activities have become the primary factor influencing the global climate.

In the debate over climate change, [Stanford climatologist Stephen] Schneider said [to reporters 10 years ago], there simply was no legitimate opposing view to the scientific consensus that man - made carbon emissions drive global warming.

Among the claims that were repeated multiple times (by Al Gore and others) were that there was no scientific debate over whether the cause of global warming was humans.

This lapse of temperature data of the ocean's interior led to the scientific question over whether the world hit a «global warming pause» in the early 2000s, which fueled debates in congress over whether climate change is real.

The conference's theme was «Climate Change: Scientific Debate and Economic Analysis» to reflect Heartland's belief that that «scientific debate is not over,» and it was designed to «call attention to widespread dissent to the asserted «consensus» on various aspects of climate change and global warmiScientific Debate and Economic Analysis» to reflect Heartland's belief that that «scientific debate is not over,» and it was designed to «call attention to widespread dissent to the asserted «consensus» on various aspects of climate change and global warming.&Debate and Economic Analysis» to reflect Heartland's belief that that «scientific debate is not over,» and it was designed to «call attention to widespread dissent to the asserted «consensus» on various aspects of climate change and global warmiscientific debate is not over,» and it was designed to «call attention to widespread dissent to the asserted «consensus» on various aspects of climate change and global warming.&debate is not over,» and it was designed to «call attention to widespread dissent to the asserted «consensus» on various aspects of climate change and global warming.»

The last few months have witnessed a flurry of debate in the scientific literature over the relative merits of using forests as carbon sinks to combat global warming.

There are many public intellectual debates occurring over scientific and skeptical issues — the place of creationism vs evolution in public science classes, the including of alternative medicine in academic curricula, the validity of debate on global warming, etc..