Flashback 2010: Dr. Roger Pielke, Jr. explains climate silliness: «There is
something about climate issue that makes people — especially but not limited to academics and scientists — completely and utterly lose their senses» — August 12, 2010
Not exact matches
The other
issue is when we talk
about doing
something about climate change, doing
something means to avoid major sea level rise, we need to reduce emissions globally starting today... seven percent per year.
By thinking hard
about what gets shared and liked on social media, they are helping to counter the «
climate silence» and ensure that the
issue remains interesting and relevant, particularly to younger audiences —
something the legacy media would do well to take note of.
«We've known just
about everything we need to know to do
something about this
issue for a very long time,» said Katharine Hayhoe, director of the Texas Tech University
Climate Science Center.
Organizing art at a fair around social
issues — particularly in our current fraught political
climate — can be risky, but there is nevertheless
something important
about seeing work that addresses the
issues that preoccupy us today.
The majority of people actively doing
something about climate are aware that the
climate issue forces one to think more fluidly
about a lot of things and question one's own assumptions.
Despite
climate policy being
something of a sleeper
issue in this election, our results suggest that concern
about the
climate is more widespread now than it was five years ago.
I strongly believe that
climate change is a serious
issue and
something needs to be done
about it now to make the world a better place for our future generations.
After a decade of grass - roots rural community angst from being ridden over roughshod by multi-national energy companies aided by state and federal governments eager to be seen to be «doing
something»
about climate change, while ignoring the basic human right to enjoy rest and repose in their own home, the
issue of health impacts will now get the hearing it deserves.
I want to choose
something that is informative and accessible, even for people without much knowledge
about climate change, politics, or environmental
issues.
On the other hand, one assumes that California is imposing this solar panel mandate because California voters think
climate change is a serious
issue that policymakers ought to do
something about.
(Thus, a payment of $ 5,000 will be made regardless of whether the U.S. government or any other government does or does not «do
something»
about the alleged
climate issue).
The natural gas and oil industry recognizes that
climate change is a serious
issue and actually does
something about it.
MC: That might be the cause, but on the other hand you look at public opinion polls
about issues that are of concern to the American public, and
climate change just isn't near the top of those lists, and maybe they made a calculated decision that a more sellable approach would be to focus on energy independence and self - sufficiency, because that's
something that people have already bought.
There's
something about the
issue of
climate change that prompts people to immediately head off to opposite sides of the room — with very few people congregating in the middle.
See http://www.cfr.org/
climate-change/candidates-
climate-change/p14765 which says that «McCain has been one of the most outspoken members of Congress on the
issue of
climate change» and he «managed to force the first real Senate vote on actually doing
something about the largest environmental peril our species has yet faced.»
Is this mere, accident, thoughtless oversight, or does such casual disregard for careful argument say
something deeper
about politicians who seek to identify themselves by the
climate issue?
Climate change is real, human beings are responsible for a good portion of it, and we need to take the
issue seriously sooner rather than later and start to do
something about it.
Solves the population
issue and then we might be able to do
something about the
climate then
But that's an entirely different
issue from the very simple one
about Mann's correlation of sediments from Finnish bridge building with global
climate fields —
something that may qualify as a classic example of spurious correlation, up with Yule's original alcoholism and C of E marriages.
It is arguably time to tackle the tropospheric humidity
issue, but this should be done from the perspective of comparing multiple data sources and assessing the uncertainty, before publishing trend analyses in the context of saying
something about climate change.
We cant afford to NOT do
something about climate change and other environmental
issues.
The day that the leading
climate scientists (and some politicians) of the world are as knowledgeable, as expert and as skilled in linguistics as Lakoff and Mirowski are
about the real
issues, maybe then
something might begin to change for the better.
It does seem that the Right prefers denial of scientific reality than do
something about their inability to deal with an
issue like
climate change.