Sentences with phrase «very dangerous warming»

One of the concepts I discuss in my talks is the carbon budget, or the remaining carbon dioxide humanity can emit before very dangerous warming occurs by the year 2100.

Although there is considerable scientific evidence that limiting warming to 1.5 degrees C is necessary to prevent very dangerous warming, a fact implicit in the recent Paris Agreement in which nations agreed to work to keep warming as close as possible from exceeding 1.5 degrees C additional warming, if the international community seeks to limit warming to 2 degrees C it must assure that global emissions do not exceed the number of tons of CO2 emissions that will raise atmospheric concentrations to levels that will cause warming of 2 degrees C.

Not exact matches

But because we committed in Paris to avoiding dangerous global warming, it's already clear that Canada's long - term picture involves very little greenhouse gas pollution.

Hence, Earth - type life around flare stars may be unlikely because their planets must be located very close to dim red dwarfs to be warmed sufficiently by star light to have liquid water (about 0.007 AU for Proxima), which makes flares even more dangerous around such stars.

Under red dwarf stars, plant - type life on land may not be possible because photosynthesis might not generate sufficient energy from infrared light to produce the oxygen needed to block dangerous ultraviolet light from such stars at the very close orbital distances needed for a planet to be warmed enough to have liquid water on its surface.

Hence, Earth - type life around flare stars may be unlikely because their planets must be located very close to dim red dwarfs to be warmed sufficiently by star light to have liquid water (between 0.02 and 0.05 AU for Wolf 424 A and B with an orbital period in 3 and 12 days), which makes flares even more dangerous around such stars.

The latter has already begun producing methane and CO2 in the Arctic, starting a feedback process which may lead to uncontrollable, very dangerous global warming, akin to that which occurred at the PETM.

But while this technological discovery keeps our devices humming and our bodies warm, it is also very dangerous if it goes unmaintained.

The smallest warming / sea level rise in TAR figure 5 will place a wide range of human and natural systems under very considerable pressure (and based on estimates of the melt - down point for greenland place us teetering on the edge of dangerous climate change).

(3) From the supporting perspective article: «All this would be very bad news if avoiding dangerous anthropogenic interference in the climate system required us to specify today a stabilization concentration of carbon dioxide (or equivalent) for which the risk of dangerous warming is acceptably low.

You have been very good about saying the preponderance of evidence points to potentially dangerous warming, and I agree with that, but that's where belief comes in, along with the precautionary principle.

«It's very dangerous to explain Rita or Katrina through global warming, because we have always had strong hurricanes in the USA - the strongest one on record dates back to 1935.»

The latter has already begun producing methane and CO2 in the Arctic, starting a feedback process which may lead to uncontrollable, very dangerous global warming, akin to that which occurred at the PETM.

As a result there is a huge gap between national commitments to reduce greenhouse gas (ghg) emissions that have been made thus far under the UNFCCC and global ghg emissions reductions that are necessary to limit warming to 2 oC, a warming limit that has been agreed to by the international community as necessary to prevent very dangerous climate change.

If you concede that climate skeptics have not proven in peer - reviewed journals that human - induced warming is not a very serious threat to human health and ecological systems, given that human - induced warming could create catastrophic warming the longer the human community waits to respond to reduce the threat of climate change and the more difficult it will be to prevent dangerous warming, do you agree that those nations most responsible for rising atmospheric ghg concentrations have a duty to demonstrate that their ghg emissions are safe?

If you concede that climate skeptics have not proven in peer - reviewed journals that human - induced warming is not a very serious threat to human health and ecological systems, given that human - induced warming could create catastrophic warming the longer the human community waits to respond to reduce the threat of climate change and the more difficult it will be to prevent dangerous warming, do you agree that those responsible for rising atmospheric ghg concentrations have a duty to demonstrate that their ghg emissions are safe?

«Climate Change Reconsidered, the 2009 report of the Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change (NIPCC), is a comprehensive 880 - page tome that rigorously analyses the IPCC's claim that dangerous global warming has «very likely» been caused by human greenhouse emissions.

Where the believers in dangerous global warming are so ignorant of the very basics of life and of science at any level they can not even give the atmospheric component they want banned its correct name but use the name of the element which is the basis of ALL life on this planet that of «Carbon» as the item that is to be eliminated from the planet..

As can be seen, there has been a cooling trend - granted, a very tiny -0.04 °C / century, but it remains far removed from the IPCC's unicorn science of «amplified» and dangerous polar warming.

In the conclusion to his «Plan B» chapter (p 228), Bob Carter writes: «It is therefore time to move away from stale «he - says - she - says» arguments about whether human carbon dioxide emissions are causing dangerous warming, and on to designing effective policies of hazard management for all climate change, based on adaptation responses that are tailored for individual countries or regions... By their very nature, strategies that can cope with the dangers and vagaries of natural climate change will readily cope with human - caused change too should it ever become manifest.»

Per the IPCC's global warming hypothesis, at the very top of the troposphere, above the equator region, is the location (12 km, 200hPa @ 20 ° N - 20 ° S) that triggers a positive climate feedback, which produces the mythical runaway, tipping point of accelerated, dangerous global warming, which of course is unequivocal and irrefutable, except when it isn't.

Looking only at a very narrow window of the Earth's climate history, many climatologists and politicians claim the recent period of warming is evidence of a dangerous human - induced warming.

As we have seen above, the commitments made according to the Copenhagen Accord and Cancun agreements that have been ratified by the Cancun agreements leave at the very minimum a 5Gt gap between emissions levels that will be achieved if there is full compliance with the voluntary emissions reductions and what is necessary to prevent 2 °C rise, a warming amount that most scientists believe could cause very dangerous climate change.

This was a very good article, in that it generated a lot of discussion, and it taught the author how real peer review works — and basically it once again falsified the «dangerous man - made global warming» conjecture.

In short, all lines of evidence point to a climate sensitivity of close to 3 °C for doubled CO2, which in turn points to a very dangerous amount of global warming if we continue on a business - as - usual path.

If this «Global Warming» is so very real, and so very dangerous, then why didn't all the hypocrites who flew to Cancun simply videoconference instead?

I think it is great that others are acknowledging the solar effects on climate, something which has been poo pooed since the global warming bandwagon got supercharged in the very early 1990s, a little more than a decade after the scientists fretted over dangerous cooling.

The idea that carbon dioxide emissions will trigger dangerous global warming is at the very heart of the climate crisis.