Sentences with phrase «scientific uncertainties about»

No nation need act to reduce the threat of climate change until all scientific uncertainties about climate change impacts are resolved.

Climate sensitivity is somewhat uncertain as there are remaining scientific uncertainties about the magnitude of the positive and negative feedbacks in the climate system.

Over and over again opponents of climate change policies have argued that nations need not act to reduce the threat of climate change because there are scientific uncertainties about the magnitude and timing of human - induced climate change impacts.

This post argues that ethics requires acknowledging the links between tornadoes and climate change despite scientific uncertainties about increased frequency and intensity of tornadoes in a warming world.

Too many of the citizens of the US and Britain still believe there is substantive scientific uncertainty about climate change — even as George Bush lives in a «green,» off - grid home and now says climate change is real.

Too many of the citizens of the US and Britain still believe there is substantive scientific uncertainty about climate change — even as George Bush lives in a «green,» off - grid home and now says climate change is real.

This is a warming level above which scientific uncertainty about the effects of climate change increases substantially.

The basic incentive problem, however, is the same and our research shows that scientific uncertainty about the dangerous threshold changes behavior dramatically,» Dannenberg says.

(c) using think tanks to manufacture claims about scientific uncertainty about climate science which have not been submitted to peer - review,

In addition, if climate change is a moral problem, even assuming counter-factually that there is considerable scientific uncertainty about whether humans are causing serious global warming, those who are putting others at risk have duties to not endanger vulnerable people without their consent.

Scientists who reviewed the article found that while it accurately described recent research on these processes, it should have provided more accurate context on the timescale of these sea level rise scenarios and the scientific uncertainty about how likely these scenarios are to come to pass.

This post examines the ethical duty to act to reduce the threat of climate change even if one assumes there is more scientific uncertainty about the causes and impacts of climate change than those identified by the scientific consensus view as articulated most recently by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).

(3) The consensus position on climate change science and why it is entitled to respect despite some scientific uncertainty about the timing and magnitude of climate change impacts and,.

Taken in the aggregate, the changes had a cumulative effect of shifting the tone and content of an already quite cautiously - worded draft to create an enhanced sense of scientific uncertainty about climate change and its implications.

Starting in October 2002, in this final - stage editorial review and clearance process, it came to my attention that CEQ Chief of Staff Philip Cooney was extensively marking up reports in a manner that had the cumulative effect of adding an enhanced sense of scientific uncertainty about global warming and minimizing its likely consequences, while also deleting even minor references to the National Assessment.

Some of the arguments against climate change policies based upon scientific uncertainty should and can be responded to on scientific grounds especially in light of the fact that many claims about scientific uncertainty about human - induced warming are great distortions of mainstream climate change science.

When you argue that nations such as the United States or states, regional, or local governments, businesses, organizations, or individuals that emit high levels of greenhouse gases (ghg) need not reduce their ghg emissions to their fair share of safe global emissions because of scientific uncertainty about adverse climate change impacts:

These questions are organized according to the most frequent arguments made against climate change policies which are claims that climate change policies: (a) will impose unacceptable costs on a national economy or specific industries or prevent nations from pursuing other national priorities, (b) should not be adopted because of scientific uncertainty about climate change impacts, or (c) are both unfair and ineffective as long as high emitting nations such as China or India do not adopt meaningful ghg emissions reduction policies.

When you argue that a nation emitting high levels of ghgs need not adopt climate change policies because there is scientific uncertainty about adverse climate change impacts, are you arguing that a nation need not take action on climate change until scientific uncertainties are resolved given that waiting to resolve all scientific uncertainties before action is taken may very likely make it too late to prevent catastrophic climate change harms to millions of people around the world?

other claims that there is scientific uncertainty about human induced climate change have not been subjected to peer - review.

I'm thinking that a newswriter could start with, «While the basics of global warming are well established, and our greenhouse gas emissions are causing the warming, with many dire consequences, there is still some scientific uncertainty about (or debate on).....»

Because it has been scientifically well established that there is a great risk of catastrophic harm from human - induced change (even though it is acknowledged that there are remaining uncertainties about timing and magnitude of climate change impacts), no high - emitting nation, sub-national government, organization, business, or individual of greenhouse gases may use some remaining scientific uncertainty about climate change impacts as an excuse for not reducing its emissions to its fair share of safe global greenhouse gas emission on the basis of scientific uncertainty.

It is not clear from candidate Romney's stated position about human causation of observable warming whether he is claiming that there is no evidence of human causation or alternatively that there is significant scientific uncertainty about links between human activities and observed warming.

Because climate change is likely to cause death to many, if not millions of people, through heat stroke, vector borne disease, and flooding, annihilate many island nations by rising seas, cause billions of dollars in property damage in intense storms, and destroy the ability of hundreds of millions to feed themselves in hotter drier climates, the duty to refrain from activities which could cause global warming is extraordinarily strong even in the face of scientific uncertainty about consequences.

Even assuming for the sake of argument that there is more scientific uncertainty about human causation of warming than that recognized by the mainstream scientific view, as we have explained in Ethicsandclimate.org before in numerous articles (See.

The huge scientific uncertainty about the cost of inaction has obscured a surprisingly strong economic consensus about the economic cost of stabilising global CO2 concentrations at the levels currently being debated by national governments, that is, in the range 450 - 550 ppm.

In a broad sense this arises both from the social uncertainty about whether and when mitigation efforts will be agreed and achieved, as well as from the scientific uncertainty about how the many feedbacks in the Earth system operate, arising from imperfect climate modelling, the role of tipping points [9] and other limits to our understanding of the system.

There is also scientific uncertainty about the future consequences of global warming.

Not exact matches

This is a familiar dodge - emphasizing uncertainty about the precise amount of humanity's contribution while ignoring the broad scientific consensus that human activities are largely responsible for dangerous warming of our planet and that action is urgently needed before it is too late.

With the increase in scientific data comes a decrease in uncertainty about how the universe works.

The CRA claims that «a continuing series of inexact scientific reports and inaccurate media accounts about high fructose corn syrup and matters of health and nutrition have... increased consumer uncertainty.»

There isn't a good scientific body of evidence that someone could pick up their blood PFOA level and say «OK, well this means my risk for some health outcome is x, y or z,» and scientists can't provide that and this is one of the places where we'll have to say we don't know and there is uncertainty about that.»

Scientists are divided about the need to label GMOs: There is little scientific evidence of health or ecological threats, but many uncertainties remain.

The AAAS Annual Meeting brings together more than 10,000 of the world's most talented and diverse scientists — yet this year select international participants who have made valuable contributions to the scientific community may not attend, due to ongoing uncertainty about the recent immigration and visa order implemented in the United States.

The economists attempt to attach cash values to physical effects about which there is great scientific uncertainty and dispute.

The results, while not as deliberate and citation - heavy as one would expect in a scientific article, are presented in appropriate «uncertainty» language and include information about the statistics behind each finding.

Government funding may remain one of the biggest uncertainties hanging over the report, despite the consensus among astronomers and astrophysicists about their scientific priorities.

The upshot is that the scientific evidence is weak in pointing a smoking gun at silicones, but the questions and uncertainty are there, so it's worth keeping a close eye on them — especially given the growing concerns about endocrine - disrupting chemicals that might produce health problems a generation after a minuscule exposure.

First, mercury is both technically and politically difficult to study; thus, scientific conclusions about some risks remain couched in uncertainty.

Originally trained as a scientist, Höller is frequently inspired by research and experiments from scientific history and deploys these studies in works that alter the audience's physical and psychological sensations, inspiring doubt and uncertainty about the world around them.

Judith Curry wrote: «He voices concerns about the following threats to scientific integrity (see especially the last page): appealing to emotions; making personal (ad hominem) attacks; deliberately mischaracterizing an inconvenient argument; inappropriate generalization; misuse of facts and uncertainties; false appeal to authority; hidden value judgments; selectively leaving out inconvenient measurement results.»

Last month, the New York Times reported that Phil Cooney, a former oil industry lobbyist working for the White House, edited scientific climate change reports to significantly exaggerate uncertainty about the science behind global warming.

Drs Leonard Smith and Nicholas Stern wrote poignantly about how policy is nearly always set in the context of uncertainty, and that even incomplete scientific assessments can be of great value («Uncertainty in science and its role in climate policy», http://www.lorentzcenter.nl/lc/web/2011/460/presentations/uncertainty, and that even incomplete scientific assessments can be of great value («Uncertainty in science and its role in climate policy», http://www.lorentzcenter.nl/lc/web/2011/460/presentations/Uncertainty in science and its role in climate policy», http://www.lorentzcenter.nl/lc/web/2011/460/presentations/Smith.pdf).

Koenig's careful description of the science and the uncertainty about what the future holds prompted a public spanking from the Center for American Progress climate blogger Joe Romm, who charged her with «scientific reticence» — alluding to NASA scientist James Hansen's paper criticizing sea - level researchers for being overly cautious in 2007 conclusions about the possible rate of sea rise in this century.

Beyond three general areas of scientific agreement, the Republican document explains «there is considerable uncertainty» about man - made climate change.»

When someone says «estimated... near 8.25» I become curious about the uncertainties (that is my scientific field).

And you witness dramas about getting attribution probabilities right — for example, the American Physical Society statement on climate change, which has a few of their members foaming — and you realize that the scientific community is full of sticklers about getting the uncertainties right (as they should).

[There is still significant uncertainty and scientific debate about hurricanes in a warming world.]

Nor do I think the scientific community is doing a bad job of talking about uncertainty and the incompleteness of the science.

Clearly, further research into the carbon cycle will be essential to reduce the level of uncertainty about the climate system's response to CO2 emissions.For further reading: R. T. Watson et al.: «Green - house gases and aero - sols» in Houghton et al., «Climate Change, the IPCC Scientific Assess - ment», Cambridge (1990).