Sentences with phrase «term climate change because»

But the ERAINT describes the atmospheric state only since 1989, and in isolation, it is not the ideal data set for making inferences about long - term climate change because it doesn't go all that far back in time.

Not exact matches

DeFrancisco said «climate change» was left out of the resolution «because it's sometimes difficult to follow the politically correct term.

The development of natural gas, far from being a bridge fuel, makes climate change worse because it is so much more potent than carbon near term.

Because of black carbon's short residency in the atmosphere, reducing black carbon emissions is considered a short - term strategy for mitigating global climate change.

He pointed to the United Kingdom, where long - term investments in power generation have stalled because climate and energy policy keeps changing «week to week.»

Because the El Niño / La Niña climate cycle generates large fluctuations in ocean temperatures around the Galápagos and in the eastern tropical Pacific, long - term changes can be hard to spot.

The stability of whole food systems may be at risk under climate change because of short - term variability in supply.

Scientists at the University of Sydney have analysed up to 22 years of long - term monitoring data on plants and animals in central Australia to project how changing rainfall and wildfire patterns, because of climate change, will influence desert wildlife.

«This is important for regional planning, because it allows policymakers to identify places where climate change dominates the observed sea level rise and places where the climate change signal is masked by shorter - term regional variability caused by natural ocean climate cycles.»

I didn't bring this up in the context of the centennial Holocene or longer term LGM climate changes because nobody has yet put forth a viable mechanism accounting for such climate changes in terms of internally generated variability.

Malcolm Turnbull, fully understanding the science fought for the ETS, In 2009 the climate deniers in the coalition proudly declared their own ignorance, Turnbull was ousted because of his commitment to the science and «Climate change is crap» Tony Abbott became the Leader, Greg Hunt (current opposition climate change minister) like Turnbull also understands the science, both now tethered purely for short term politicclimate deniers in the coalition proudly declared their own ignorance, Turnbull was ousted because of his commitment to the science and «Climate change is crap» Tony Abbott became the Leader, Greg Hunt (current opposition climate change minister) like Turnbull also understands the science, both now tethered purely for short term politicClimate change is crap» Tony Abbott became the Leader, Greg Hunt (current opposition climate change minister) like Turnbull also understands the science, both now tethered purely for short term politicclimate change minister) like Turnbull also understands the science, both now tethered purely for short term political gain

Eric, thanks for the even - handed treatment of this «new» climate data, but I remain an anthropogenically - caused climate change skeptic because of the extraordinarily high number of unproved variables that must be shown to be true, in order for man's puny efforts at controlling the climate to have any long term effect.

Some years back, we hypothesized that changes to climate variability, rather than changes to mean climate, might tip the balance towards the chytrid fungus because all pathogens are smaller and have faster metabolisms than their hosts, and thus might acclimate more quickly following short - term temperature shifts [link].

The agency chose these actions because it said they all meet these criteria: They can result in significant near - term emissions reductions, do not curb economic growth, rely only on existing technologies and proven policies and produce significant benefits beyond climate change mitigation.

``... estimates of future rises remain hazy, mostly because there are many uncertainties, from the lack of data on what ice sheets did in the past to predict how they will react to warming, insufficient long - term satellite data to unpick the effects of natural climate change from that caused by man and a spottiness in the degree to which places such as Antarctica have warmed....

We have to decarbonize, not just because of carbon dioxide and climate change in the longer term, but because it is killing us directly right now.

It didn't really work for sulfur, and will surely not work for fossil CO2 and long - term climate change, because for that question, it doesn't matter where on the planet you burn fossil fuels, as CO2 has a long lifetime in the atmosphere.

Because responding to climate change will require long - term investment in infrastructure, research and mitigation, we need an economic environment that is sufficiently consistent to reward such investment.

We now know that to be false — not because of the natural long - term variations in climate (to which you refer and which water planners could safely ignore), but to new, short - term dramatic changes that result from human - induced climate change.

In his memorandum, Luntz urges that the term «climate change» be used instead of «global warming,» because «while «global warming» has catastrophic communications attached to it, «climate change» sounds a more controllable and less emotional challenge.»

Of course, as they point out «because rainfall is such a variable element, trend values are highly dependent on the start and end dates of the analysis» and the fact they are simply using linear interpolation it is very difficult to derive anything meaningful in terms of climate change from just one map.

It's because atmospheric scientists will have the chance to look at climate change in a short - term scale.

The issue of «climate change» more properly defined as CAGW, breaks down overwhelmingly in terms of left - right because it is at its core a debate between progressive and conservative principals of governance..

It's especially essential to their mythos because they see it upsets the Christians, and conservatives who proved how stupid they were to play the Global Warming game (evolved into Climate Change as a strategy to help keep up the delusion and sleep going by introducing confusion of playing the name change game and making the term more bChange as a strategy to help keep up the delusion and sleep going by introducing confusion of playing the name change game and making the term more bchange game and making the term more broad).

«Global warming» is the best term for the current human - caused climate change because it is the main characteristic feature of the change.

Reinforcing that skepticism is not a wise long - term strategy for climate hawks, because I can guarantee that climate change is eventually going to require activist government.

Both Abbott and Harper are strongly opposed to taking serious action on climate change because they see it as not good for the quest for ever more short - term profits.

For instance, T. Palmer, a scientist at the European center for medium - range weather forecast, writes in the journal «Weather» that climate predictions using GCMs could be grossly misleading because the computer simulations may be unable to accurately predict long - term changes in the frequency of weather patterns.

Activists are also fighting Rover and other fossil fuel infrastructure projects on climate change grounds because the new installations can have a lifespan of 50 years or more, locking in new carbon emissions over the long term.

By Craig Lindberg Perhaps Dana Nuccitelli and others can't come to terms with the death of the AGW hypothesis because Climate Change hasn't been properly eulogized.

Clinton specifically used the term «climate change» in her answer: «So I have a comprehensive energy policy, but it really does include fighting climate change, because I think that is a serious problem,» she said.

Rep. Bob Inglis, a six - term Republican Congressman from South Carolina and member of the House Committee on Science and Technology, lost his primary bid for re-election to a Tea Party - backed candidate who accused him of not being conservative enough, at least in part because of his record of accepting reality on climate change.

Listening to the Radio 4 feedback on the Met Office 5 - year forecast makes it clear that even the Met Office don't trust a 5 - year forecast because of natural variability (it is called experimental), and this one does not change their view of climate warming in the longer term.

Second — and this is the real kicker — it was Frank Luntz, a Republican strategist, who convinced Republicans to switch phrases because the term «climate change» is less frightening, and therefore easier to downplay.

of course not because that is a very vague term «climate change» especially since A. Global Warming has been mostly abandoned as a talking point and your not mentioning the «amount» of climate change.

But I think the Obama administration decided early - on to frame the issue, not in terms of, we have to do this because if we don't, climate change is going to have terribly harmful impacts on the U.S. and globally.

Many opponents of climate change policies argue that countries like the United States should not have to reduce their ghg emissions until China reduces its emissions by comparable amounts because China is now the largest emitter of all nations in terms of total tons, yet such an argument usually ignores the historical responsibility of countries like the United States which the following illustration reveals is more than twice as responsible for current elevated atmospheric ghg concentrations than China is.

Either by design (the researchers found conservative think tanks prefer «global warming» to «climate change») or because of how our minds processes the terms («global warming» seems to lead to an expectation of noticeably higher temperatures here and now), the concept of «global warming» meets significantly more resistance than «climate change.»

The fact that the models can be made to simulate unforced climate behavior is of course only a first step in enabling them to simulate forced climate change, but because it involves validation against observed data, it is informative at least in terms of the unforced phenomena in showing that the models have probably estimated the real world phenomena with reasonable accuracy.

Because natural gas may produce less CO2 equivalent per unit of energy produced, natural gas companies are pushing natural gas as at least a short - to medium - term solution to climate change

Best I can figure out because the end results of climate change is still 100 years out there, you can suggest in the near term things can happen that appear to be a falsification.

Attribution of past short term events such as the MWP and LIA will always be more difficult than with current climate change because the further back we go the less data we have, both regarding the extent of the changes that took place and the various factors which were in play.

This is important because short - term climate variability can be misinterpreted as underlying climate change resulting in poor science and potentially worse policy decisions.

So, there's long term drying of the southwest because of man made climate change?

In terms of climate change forcing, because H2O is abundantly available and quickly responsive to temperature, it is correctly given no weight.

org, US reductions need to be much greater than average reduction levels required of the entire world as a matter of equity because the United States emissions are among the world's highest in terms of per capita and historical emissions and there is precious little atmospheric space remaining for additional ghg emissions if the world is serious about avoiding dangerous climate change.

Yet action to address the risk is complicated because of what Wagner and Weitzman call the Big Four problems: Any one country's effort to prevent climate change alone would be ineffective; political systems struggle to address long - term challenges; by the time humanity decides to act aggressively, it may be too late; and the risks are highly uncertain, which makes them easy to dismiss.

Because of that work and many follow - on studies conducted for state and city officials, New York has incorporated climate - change adaptation and resilience into its long - term planning initiatives, which include upgrading building codes and managing parks and wetlands to accommodate flooding and sea - level rise.

In terms of advocates, and I don't think it's a problem because climate change is complicated.

In a world that is in dire need of action on climate change some are denying that it is happening, others want to support mining and the fossil fuel industry for short - term economic or selfish reasons, still others are in favour of renewable energy anywhere other than near them, while Dr Pierpont, Ms Laurie and those like them are slowing adoption of sustainable energy because of ignorance and delusion.