Because whatever the uncertainties
surrounding climate prediction, the fundamental science is pretty clear.
Not exact matches
«I have found myself increasingly chastised by
climate change campaigners when my public statements and lectures on
climate change have not satisfied their thirst for environmental drama and exaggerated rhetoric... Why is it not just campaigners, but politicians and scientists too, who are openly confusing the language of fear, terror and disaster with the observable physical reality of
climate change, actively ignoring the careful hedging which
surrounds science's
predictions?»
Complexity of the
climate system and uncertainty
surrounding input data preclude extremely accurate
predictions, but they are not incompatible with an ability to approximate real world outcomes within a range narrow enough to justify future planning on the basis of reasonable probabilities.
The representation of cloud processes in global atmospheric models has been recognized for decades as the source of much of the uncertainty
surrounding predictions of
climate variability.
Overall, the synopsis emphasized the positive effects of
climate change over the negative, the uncertainty
surrounding predictions of future change rather than the emerging consensus and the low end of harmful impact estimates rather than the high end.