Sentences with phrase «scientists about climate risk»

The Vision Prize is an online survey of scientists about climate risk.

Not exact matches

The co-chair of the working group responsible for the report, climate scientist Chris Field, spoke repeatedly and eloquently about the need, in the face of uncertainty, to weigh up the risks of possible outcomes.

The BBC team used clever analogies and appealing graphics to discuss three key numbers that help clarify important questions about climate change: 0.85 degrees Celsius — how much the Earth has warmed since the 1880s; 95 % — how sure scientists are that human activity is the major cause of Earth's recent warming; and one trillion tons — the best estimate of the amount of carbon that can be burned before risking dangerous climate change.

«Too often in debates about climate change risk, the starting point is a presumption that only global warming in excess of 2 °C represents a threat to humanity,» says climate scientist Michael Mann of Pennsylvania State University, College Park.

Expertise needed: (1) engineers with knowledge about pipeline risk and reliability, (2) scientists with knowledge of climate change that could be caused by tar sands development.»

The vast majority of climate scientists say that emissions generated by humans are changing the climate and putting the planet at long - term risk, although they are uncertain about the exact magnitude of that risk.

Many climate scientists, bloggers and readers have weighed in this morning online and in my in - box to complain about my short print story assessing the risk of overstatement or inaccuracy facing everyone pressing an argument about climate science and policy.

Kahan says this doesn't affect the ability of the climate scientists to evaluate risk — he's talking about just the audience / citizens / voters.

Exxon spokesman Ken Cohen either misunderstood or misrepresented the chart pictured above as he pushed back against an InsideClimate News investigation into what Exxon's own scientists knew about the emerging risks of climate change, and when they knew it.

Exxon spokesman Ken Cohen either misunderstood or misrepresented his selected chart the other day as he pushed back against an InsideClimate News investigation into what Exxon's own scientists knew about the emerging risks of climate change, and when they knew it.

While those who stand in denial of climate change have failed in the last 15 years to produce a single, peer - reviewed scientific journal article that challenges the theory and evidence of human - induced climate change, mainstream media was, until very recently, covering the story (in more than half the cases, according to the academic researchers Boykoff and Boykoff) by quoting one scientist talking about the risks and one purported expert saying that climate change was not happening — or might actually be a good thing.

Most of the climate skeptics I have run into think that scientists should say nothing about risk until disciplinary norms of the sciences have been met.

In a letter to Attorney General Loretta Lynch last year, 20 climate scientists urged her to use federal racketeering laws to prosecute corporations and think tanks that have «deceived the American people about the risks of climate change.»

Those who push using RICO laws against «corporations and other organizations that have knowingly deceived the American people about the risks of climate change» («other organizations» meaning conservative think tanks and any skeptic climate scientist having any association with such entities) are likely emboldened because they've never before encountered push - back on the very core of their accusation.

Assessments can not be alarmist, but they must henceforth push scientists beyond their comfort zones in framing conclusions that will adequately inform decision - makers about the full range of potential risk — particularly those decision - makers who worry about how to adapt and / or how to mainstream climate risk into their other decisions.

Dr. Shukla was one of twenty scientists who wrote a letter to President Obama, Attorney General Loretta Lynch, and White House science advisor John Holdren last month, endorsing a call by Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D - RI) for an investigation under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) of «corporations and other organizations that have knowingly deceived the American people about the risks of climate change, as a means to forestall America's response to climate change.»

Organizations around the world to join with IUGG and its member Associations to encourage scientists to communicate freely and widely with public and private decision - makers about the consequences and risks of on - going climate change and actions that can be taken to limit climate change and promote adaptation; and

«One major concern about wildfires becoming more frequent in permafrost areas is the potential to put the vast amounts of carbon stored there at increased risk of being emitted and further amplify warming,» said Todd Sanford, a climate scientist at Climate Central and lead author of the group's newly released report on Alaskan wildfires, by climate scientist at Climate Central and lead author of the group's newly released report on Alaskan wildfires, by Climate Central and lead author of the group's newly released report on Alaskan wildfires, by e-mail.

A bunch of climate alarmist scientists have written to President Obama urging him to use RICO legislation against corporations which may «knowingly have deceived the American people about the risks of climate change.»

It's not that climate scientists are too conservative because of waiting to confirm the system was changing, it is that they are too conservative because most of the literature is still driven by steady state modelling and communications about calculable risk, whereas I would say the risk is inherently incalcuable after BAU for another decade or so.

Ben Kirtman, a climate scientist at the University of Miami and a lead author of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change's latest assessment, said he and other scientists have tried talking to politicians in Florida about these risks, including both Scott and Rubio, who is a possible presidential contender iclimate scientist at the University of Miami and a lead author of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change's latest assessment, said he and other scientists have tried talking to politicians in Florida about these risks, including both Scott and Rubio, who is a possible presidential contender iClimate Change's latest assessment, said he and other scientists have tried talking to politicians in Florida about these risks, including both Scott and Rubio, who is a possible presidential contender in 2016.

Most importantly the growing disconnect between what the scientists are saying about the risks of climate change and public sentiment about the topic.

In addition to concealing the known risks, Exxon and Suncor... directed, participated in, and benefited from efforts to misleadingly cast doubt about the causes and consequences of climate change, including: (1) making affirmative and misleading statements suggesting that continued and unabated fossil fuel use was safe (in spite of internal knowledge to the contrary); and (2) attacking climate science and scientists that tried to report truthfully about the dangers of climate change.

News of a letter signed by 20 scientists to President Obama (imploring him to use the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) to punish immoral «corporations and other organizations that have knowingly deceived the American people about the risks of climate change «-RRB- first popped up around mid September.

Around 200 scientists have gathered for the meeting in Exeter, UK, to thrash out the risks that climate change poses to the world and feed this information to the policy makers who must decide what to do about it.

On the contrary, when scientific results have policy implications, we believe it is an obligation of climate scientists to draw attention to those implications.Otherwise, as history has shown, we run the risk of laypeople drawing conclusions about this complex issue that are erroneous, ill - informed, misleading and counterproductive.

And, like most outspoken government scientists who have served under the Bush administration, Hansen was effectively muzzled for his efforts to spread the word about the risks of unmitigated climate change — subject to constant review and censorship.

«Too often in debates about climate change risk, the starting point is a presumption that only global warming in excess of 2 °C represents a threat to humanity,» says climate scientist Michael Mann of Pennsylvania State University, College Park.

In order to develop specific, localized climate action plans, stakeholders and scientists need to work together to learn about climate risks, brainstorm strategies and prioritize implementation.