Sentences with phrase «see the real climate»

Gentlepeople, well done on nipping any controversy in the bud — as usual; though I'm left wondering if the warming trend isn't related to a subject that i'd like to see Real Climate Address more often; The possible shut - down of The North Atlantic Conveyor — as extreme warming of the Southern Oceans, along with the plunging of Europe into a new Ice Age would be the result of this, as I'm sure you all know.

See this Real Climate post: Why greenhouse gases heat the ocean.

See this Real Climate post for explanation.

See this Real Climate article and the links therin.

Unless these things were hiding and this is a poorly planned game of Where's Waldo, nowhere in those 31 pages did we see any REAL climate justice ideology.

Not exact matches

We are going to see a real marketplace to develop into a responsible and more economically and socially conscious climate versus the greed and simply a money grabbing that we saw at the end of the last year.

ICOs will be more regulated in the future, and a real marketplace will see a responsible climate versus the greed and a money grabbing, believes Zachary Reece, Managing Partner at BlockTrade Investments.

Yet, if I understand your views regarding the modern state of Israel and its current conflict with its neighbors correctly, I do have some real concerns — particularly in light of the current political climate (the U.N. vote on Palestinian statehood) as well as a growing trend among certain Christian polemicists against Israel (see Gary Burge and Stephen Sizer).

1 Etymology 2 History 2.1 Prehistory 2.2 Medieval kingdoms 2.3 European contact (15th century) 2.4 Independence (1957) 2.5 Operation Cold Chop and aftermath 2.6 21st century 3 Historical timeline 4 Geography 4.1 Climate 4.2 Rivers 4.3 Wildlife 5 Government 5.1 Foreign relations 5.2 Law enforcement and Police 5.3 Military 5.4 Administrative divisions 6 Transportation 7 Economy 7.1 Key sectors 7.2 Manufacturing 7.3 Petroleum and natural gas production 7.4 Industrial minerals mining 7.5 Real estate 7.6 Trade and exports 7.7 Electricity generation sector 7.8 Economic transparency 8 Science and technology 8.1 Innovations and HOPE City 8.2 Space and satellite programmes 8.3 Cybernetics and cyberwarfare 8.4 Health and biotechnology 9 Education 9.1 Overview 9.2 Enrollment 9.3 Foreign students 9.4 Funding of education 9.5 Provision of educational material 9.6 Kindergarten and education structure 9.7 Elementary 9.8 High school 9.9 University 10 Demographics 10.1 Population 10.2 Legal immigration 10.3 Illegal immigration 10.4 Language 10.5 Religion 10.6 Fertility and reproductive health 11 Universal health care and health care provision 12 Culture 12.1 Food and drink 12.2 Literature 12.3 Adinkra 12.4 Traditional clothing 12.5 Modern clothing 12.6 Music and dance 12.7 Film 12.8 Media 12.9 Sports 12.10 Cultural heritage and architecture 13 National symbols 14 Tourism 15 See also 16 References 17 Further reading 18 External links

So, if we get climate change wrong there is a very real danger we shall see levels of mass migration as yet unparalleled.

The only real climate change solutions that I have seen are to reduce carbon dioxide in the air by having human activity emit less of it.

He's not convinced climate change has made its way into real estate pricing, though, and he doesn't see sea - level rise influencing shorter - term investors or speculators.

He's beginning to see evidence that suggests climate change is now a part of the gentrification story in Miami real estate.

«There are real questions about whether we are beginning to see a shift in vegetation types driven by fire activity fueled by fire suppression and climate change.»

Damian said... see «Real Climate» and «Grist».

But after it became clear it was real, some also became annoyed at what they saw as more of a communications campaign than a commitment to tackling climate change.

To see whether the lab test is an accurate predictor how bees respond to heat in the real world, Hamblin used urban heat islands to mimic climate change, following bee populations at 18 places around Wake County over two years.

For each 15 - year period, the authors compared the temperature change we've seen in the real world with what the climate models suggest should have happened.

Frigid weather like the two - week cold spell that began around Christmas is 15 times rarer than it was a century ago, according to a team of international scientists who does real - time analyses to see if extreme weather events are natural or more likely to happen because of climate change.

Instead of trashing real climate scientists who study nuclear winter as stooges of KGB manipulation, maybe the FBI should see if the Wegman fiasco might be an actual example of their observation that «foreign researchers may be under pressure to make their research conclude what their government wants it to conclude, or they may be ordered to write completely fabricated studies.»

Rather than alluring to the obvious shocking facts and events affecting our planet and way of life, audiences actually see Al Gore for what he's really doing in real life «being the most influential person of his generation» inspiring others to take up arms in the fight for Climate and how the world's democracies are politically unwise when it comes to using the actual solutions.

But a climate of reduced budgets has seen schools turning to their outside spaces to alleviate the pressures of overcrowded classrooms and there is little sign on the horizon of schools being offered any real help in addressing this problem.

In this age of accountability, I wonder if data and formulas that the common person can not understand (see also, School Climate School Wide Agreement variance formula) are not diluting and distorting the REAL story of strong school culture.

Climate change is a real thing and as it continues to slowly heat up our world, we can expect to see some disastrous consequences across America.

Scientific debate as seen here on Real Climate, with data certified by experts to support arguments, in completely unknown.

I actually don't see my comment to which you are replying, but I have it archived if there is ever need for distribution Real Climate has been known to censor «uncomfortable» posts.

By every definition of * real * climate that I have seen, a minimum of 25 to 30 years of data are required to define climate, preferably longer.

Also see this post on Global Dimming at Real Climate.

It was a good deed to give Dennis Schmitt a forum to respond to Patrick Michaels since Michaels doesn't offer one, we need to see less of the tug of war and more of the real evolving science as scientists strive to fill in gaps in data and missing links in climate models, and to understand feedbacks and the coupled dynamics of land, air and water.

Apparently self - appointed armchair climatologists are free to do this sort of handwaving and see it published before a global audience, courtesy of «The Register», even as they nitpick and complain about real climatologists» refinement of real climate models.

This result would be strongly dependent on the exact dynamic response of the Greenland ice sheet to surface meltwater, which is modeled poorly in todays global models.Yes human influence on the climate is real and we might even now be able to document changes in the behavior of weather phenomena related to disasters (e.g., Emanuel 2005), but we certainly haven't yet seen it in the impact record (i.e., economic losses) of extreme events.

But with the very real prospect of electricity replacing oil for much of our transportation fuel, and efficiency and renewables squeezing the traditional utility model hard, it doesn't take divine insight to start seeing that forward - thinking investors would be wise to factor in climate exposure to every investment they make.

Yes human influence on the climate is real and we might even now be able to document changes in the behavior of weather phenomena related to disasters (e.g., Emanuel 2005), but we certainly haven't yet seen it in the impact record (i.e., economic losses) of extreme events.

Steve, aside from the fact that Climatology is not a «debate», so there are not 2 sides, the comment section posts here are NOT «the blog», that consists of the lead articles by the group of scientists known as «Real Climate», for which see the Contributors link, the comments are from folks like you and me, generally non-scientists with varied opinions and sometimes clashing personalities.

I clearly have a bias (in that I believe based on the evidence I've seen that AGW is both real and dangerous enough to warrant strong action), but when I see a reference to a climate mechanism I know nothing about (the PDO in this instance), I tend to want to look at the available literature before leaping to conclusions based on my bias.

I said no it didn't & he'd better check out RealClimate.org to see its critique by real climate scientists (luckily you're on that topic again, in case he visits here).

Please see Scaffeta's reply for your self, in the Real Climate section which is linked above, and then decide for your self as to whether Scaffeta's methodology and selected time period is valid.

Some might see USCAP as being leaders in the industry around climate change - but I think their real goal is to ensure they dominate public discourse and have strong lobbying positions for any future climate / carbon legislation.

[Explore this Real Climate post to see how much this finding conflicts with what had been conventional wisdom.]

The problem is that thus far that ideal has been easier for academics and pundits to identify than for climate negotiators (see the Kyoto process) due to very real political and economic constraints (see David Victor's new book).

Iâ $ ™ d still like to see Willis and his fellow AGW recalcitrants start a fresh debate over there so I can see them put those wacky climate scientists in their place and teach them a thing or to about real science, the type that doesnâ $ ™ t impact on business profits.

It's the long - term range (30 - plus year cycles) that scientists look at to determine real changes in the climate system, and the changes scientists see are unmistakable.

Over the next week or so, RC commenters, abetted by Real Climate moderator Eric Steig, used Hantemirov's criticism to launched one tirade after another against me: see page 4 and page 5.

Dr Roy Spencer writes: As seen in the following graphic, over the period of the satellite record (1979 - 2012), both the surface and satellite observations produce linear temperature trends which are below... Climate Change Is Real.

Noticing a lack of visceral responses from the anti GW crowd, I tried a simple little experiment to see if Real Climate was a truly open discussion forum or a propaganda site.

From finance and real estate, food processing to telecommunications companies from across sectors are laying out their intention to align their business practices with the latest climate science, while new and important sectors, including chemicals and automobiles could see an rapid uptake of target setting over the next two years.

Richard, If you go back to the exchanges with Ryan O'Donnell, Jeff «Id», and others at Real climate after Steig et al's Nature cover article (and its claim of nearly uniform Antarctic warming), you will see the same kinds of dismissive, hostile comments from the RealClimate crew, at least in the comments they didn't later «disappear» to make themselves look better, as Nic and PaulK got in this case.

So far, I have seen no traffic at Real Climate on this post because they have cut off the thread.

It is to be seen whether his remark was merely a «rhetoric» or something which meant real works on the ground to fight the challenge of climate change.

Securing Senate support for climate agreements is difficult under any circumstances, but unless all major countries are seen as committing to real action, it will be hopeless.