There is also
scientific uncertainty about the future consequences of global warming.
Not exact matches
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.
... The Environmentalist narrative of catastrophe, doom, and apocalypse, once given superficial
scientific plausibility (in that science can not exclude the possibility of such things happening — which it never could), provides doubt and
uncertainty about the security of the
future, which in turn provides political momentum and legitimacy for environmental policies.
Hallegatte [8] notes that these sources of
uncertainty will not go away in the foreseeable
future: social
uncertainties will play out over decades, and recent experiences of improving
scientific understanding have often led to more
uncertainty about the
future rather than less [10], as the implications of unappreciated processes such as ice - sheet dynamics become clearer.
That's because their disagreements are not just
about interpretations of
scientific data, but
about how they assess the risks, amid the
uncertainty over global warming's
future impact.