Sentences with phrase «understanding human causes of climate change»

Research effort and funding has focused on understanding human causes of climate change.

Not exact matches

«A full reading of Bernstein's email reveals an important point ---- his assertion that, in the 1980s, we never denied the possible role of human activity as a cause for climate change, and he further makes clear that, at that point in time, there was a great deal of uncertainty and lack of understanding of climate change, even among leading scientists and experts,» said Keil, adding that today, Exxon «believes the risk of climate change is clear, and warrants action.»

Understanding these unique areas is important because there are many examples of naturally occurring hybrid zones, and new hybrid zones will form in the future as climate change and human impacts cause species distributions to shift and come into contact.

There are some parts of the picture which are clear, particularly the way that climate change is causing westerly winds to shift southwards, but there are still huge gaps that we need to fill in order to fully understand how much human activity is changing weather in the region.

«This quantitative attribution of human and natural climate influences on the IPWP expansion increases our confidence in the understanding of the causes of past changes as well as for projections of future changes under further greenhouse warming,» commented Seung - Ki Min, a professor with POSTECH's School of Environmental Science and Engineering.

At first, White was convinced that humans would understand the obvious implications of his ice - core data: The consequences of human - caused climate change «would basically cripple any kind of modern society.»

The lines of evidence and analysis supporting the mainstream position on climate change are diverse and robust — embracing a huge body of direct measurements by a variety of methods in a wealth of locations on the Earth's surface and from space, solid understanding of the basic physics governing how energy flow in the atmosphere interacts with greenhouse gases, insights derived from the reconstruction of causes and consequences of millions of years of natural climatic variations, and the results of computer models that are increasingly capable of reproducing the main features of Earth's climate with and without human influences.

[4] One thing is certain, there is no «scientific proof» as the term is generally understood, that human emissions are the main cause of climate change today.

There are many interesting comments from proponents of human caused climate change (AGW or anthropogenic global warming) and from sceptics which show an astonishing range of differing interpretations and understandings of the so called Greenhouse Effect none of which bear much relation to the actuality.

YPCCC cited research published in Science that found that only 30 percent of middle school and 45 percent of high school science teachers understand the degree of scientific consensus on human - caused climate change.

The statement continues: «While the understanding of the drivers and consequences of climate change will continue to advance with additional research, the fundamental premise remains sound that human life has altered the atmosphere and is one of the causes of climate change.»

Most don't understand models or the mathematics on which they are built, a fact exploited by promoters of human caused climate change.

Their work encompasses a range of problems and time scales: from five - day model predictions of hurricane track and intensity, to understanding the causes of changes in extremes over the past century, to building new climate prediction models for seamless predictions out to the next several years, to earth system model projections of human - caused changes in various extremes (heat waves, hurricanes, droughts, etc.) over the coming century.

But neglecting causation in the opposite direction (clouds cause temperature) can lead to large errors in our understanding of how and why the climate system changes, as well as in our diagnosis of how sensitive the climate system is to human influences.»

So people not admitting that «climate change» is human cause... don't understand any of the points above.

As Edward Maibach, director of the Center for Climate Change Communication at George Mason University, says, people are influenced largely «by what their friends and family members think about climate change, by news media coverage of climate science, (for example, the recent release of the third National Climate Assessment), by their understanding of the scientific consensus about human - caused climate change, by statements made by the political leaders they trust, and by their own «personal experiences» with climate change.Climate Change Communication at George Mason University, says, people are influenced largely «by what their friends and family members think about climate change, by news media coverage of climate science, (for example, the recent release of the third National Climate Assessment), by their understanding of the scientific consensus about human - caused climate change, by statements made by the political leaders they trust, and by their own «personal experiences» with climate change.&Change Communication at George Mason University, says, people are influenced largely «by what their friends and family members think about climate change, by news media coverage of climate science, (for example, the recent release of the third National Climate Assessment), by their understanding of the scientific consensus about human - caused climate change, by statements made by the political leaders they trust, and by their own «personal experiences» with climate change.climate change, by news media coverage of climate science, (for example, the recent release of the third National Climate Assessment), by their understanding of the scientific consensus about human - caused climate change, by statements made by the political leaders they trust, and by their own «personal experiences» with climate change.&change, by news media coverage of climate science, (for example, the recent release of the third National Climate Assessment), by their understanding of the scientific consensus about human - caused climate change, by statements made by the political leaders they trust, and by their own «personal experiences» with climate change.climate science, (for example, the recent release of the third National Climate Assessment), by their understanding of the scientific consensus about human - caused climate change, by statements made by the political leaders they trust, and by their own «personal experiences» with climate change.Climate Assessment), by their understanding of the scientific consensus about human - caused climate change, by statements made by the political leaders they trust, and by their own «personal experiences» with climate change.climate change, by statements made by the political leaders they trust, and by their own «personal experiences» with climate change.&change, by statements made by the political leaders they trust, and by their own «personal experiences» with climate change.climate change.&change.»

The study cites Spencer and Bast along with other «manufacturers of doubt,» whose work to undermine the public understanding of this consensus has been stunningly successful — only 12 percent of Americans, their previous work found, know that more than 90 percent of scientists agree on this — and has resulted in «cascading effects on public understanding that climate change is happening, human caused, a serious threat, and in turn, support for climate change mitigation and adaptation policies.»

While you acknowledged that the climate is changing and that humans are having an impact on it, it is critically important that you understand that emissions of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases are the primary cause.

To understand why «this current» global warming is human caused and not natural cycle, one needs to get an idea of what the natural cycle is and what are the basic mechanisms that cause climate change in the natural cycle.

Scientists know that recent climate change is largely caused by human activities from an understanding of basic physics, comparing observations with models, and fingerprinting the detailed patterns of climate change caused by different human and natural influences.

«There are some parts of the picture which are clear, particularly the way that climate change is causing westerly winds to shift southwards, but there are still huge gaps that we need to fill in order to fully understand how much human activity is changing weather in the region.»

But we consider it to be our responsibility as professionals to ensure, to the best of our ability, that people understand what we know: human - caused climate change is happening, we face risks of abrupt, unpredictable and potentially irreversible changes, and responding now will lower the risk and cost of taking action.

It is the understanding of the power of the carbon cycle and the primary role played by geological processes that promotes doubt in some geologists minds that present - day climate change is caused by human - sourced CO2 in the atmosphere; they simply don't believe that we humans have that much influence.

If you mean that human caused climate change should have been better addressed by WG1, I think societies impact on climate is implicit in the physics, at least in terms of CO2 and biome impacts, and WG1 was intended to provide an understanding of the physical science, which I don't find reductionist.

Though about 97 percent of working scientists agree that the evidence shows a warming trend caused by humans, public understanding of climate change falls along political lines.