Sentences with phrase «warming science under»
For more than a week, the episode has fueled a fierce debate on the blogosphere and in newspaper opinion columns and once again placed global warming science under intense scrutiny.
https://www.nytimes.com/ Not exact matches
They found that western Antarctica has recently seen warmer, saltier water being driven under the shelf — the part of the ice sheet that sticks out over the ocean (Science, doi.org/xkx).
«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.
«Science tells us that we can not say with any certainty what constitutes a dangerous level of warming, and therefore what level must be avoided,» Paula Dobriansky, under secretary of state for global affairs and the leader of the American delegation, said in her remarks to the conference.»
«The polar bear was the first species protected under the Endangered Species Act solely because of threats from global warming,» said Shaye Wolf, climate science director for the Center for Biological Diversity, an environmental group.
published report, Hayward stated that holding the US back from fulfilling it's petroleum - based product requirements is «a reluctance to develop the nation's massive natural resources under the mistaken belief in the unproven science that claims carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions from burning of fossil fuels is the major cause of recent and future warming of the Earth.
Best way to keep you hedgie healthy is to feed a good diet (I like Hills Science Diet Feline Mainenance), keep them warm (get a under cage heating pad, I like the reptile heating pads made by Fleuker), and get her a chinchilla metal flying saucer.
Under the heading «Science Links» are some very helpful links, especially the very first one, Spencer Weart's on - line book The Discovery of Global Warming.
But, no, anyone who gets their climate science from the WSJ editorial pages (and I suspect many influential business leaders do) will still be under the impression that the MSU data proves that global warming's a myth...
«Science tells us that we can not say with any certainty what constitutes a dangerous level of warming, and therefore what level must be avoided,» Paula Dobriansky, under secretary of state for global affairs and the leader of the American delegation, said in her remarks to the conference.»
The science is clear to me and to most experts in the various fields associated with climate science: Humans are causing most of the observed global warming in the past several decades and, if we continue emitting GHGs under a «business as usual» scenario, it will become increasingly difficult and costly to adapt to the changes that are likely to occur.
Under Smith's leadership the House Science, Space and Technology Committee has held hearings that have critically examined global warming.
Posted in Carbon, CLIMATE SCIENCE, Development and Climate Change, Disaster and Emergency, Disasters and Climate Change, Ecosystem Functions, Environment, Global Warming, Green House Gas Emissions, Information and Communication, International Agencies, Land, News, Publication, Research, Resilience, River, Vulnerability, Water Comments Off on Climate Change May Bring Bigger Waves For Down Under
Filed under Climate Alarmism, Climate Change, Co2 Insanity, Global Warming, NOAA, Piers Corbyn, Science, Sea - Level, The Met Office, Weather
Filed under Climate Alarmism, Climate Change, Climate Disruption, Co2 Insanity, Global Warming, Government, NASA, NOAA, Politics, Sattelitegate, Science, Truth Stranger than Fiction
Commenting on the latest deception surrounding the «warmest on record» claim, Spencer said that even science itself was under assault by the politically driven warming alarmists.
Secondly, under the stated methodology of the paper it is perfectly possible for studied not * primarily * about climate science to be included if the abstract implies or states that human caused global warming is real.
The most recent example appeared in a September 2009 issue of Science under the title Recent Warming Reverses Long - Term Arctic Cooling.
He manages to publish articles by every biased organisation under the sun from global warming sceptics, real science poo pooers, ideological nutcases, one eyed fossil fuel lobbyists, sycophants of large business politicos, and the would be destroyers of public services and regulation.
Why on earth Mr Lacis raves on about the ins and outs of the technical issues under discussion in the area of climate science / global warming when it is the issue of the ethical and legal aspects of Gleick's actions that are the immediate issue.
Turn Down the Heat, a snapshot of the latest climate science prepared for the Bank by the Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research in 2012, says we are on a path to a 4 °C (7.2 °F) warmer world by the end of this century under current greenhouse gas emissions pledges.
This same practice of Lysenkoism has long been under way in western science in regard to the politically correct theory of man caused, catastrophic, global warming.
It's called «attribution» and diverse investigation into attribution is yet another sorely under - researched area of climate science as witnessed by the response to «the pause» — prior to its (the pause) recognition by mainstream climate science, consensus was that most warming circa late 20th C was anthropogenic.
Thanks, I have this included already in the The Anti «Man - Made» Global Warming Resource under Greenland - Heat From Earth's Magma Contributing To Melting Of Greenland Ice (Science Daily)
On what specific basis do you disregard the mainstream scientific view that holds that the Earth is warming, that the warming is mostly human caused, and that harsh impacts from warming are very likely under business - as - usual, conclusions supported by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, the United States Academy of Sciences and over a hundred of the most prestigious scientific organizations in the world whose membership includes scientists with expertise relevant to the science of climate change including the American Association for the Advancement of Science, the American Geophysical Union, the American Institute of Physics, the American Meteorological Society, the Royal Meteorological Society, and the Royal Society of the UK and according to the American Academy of Sciences 97 percent of scientists who actually do peer - reviewed research on climate science of climate change including the American Association for the Advancement of Science, the American Geophysical Union, the American Institute of Physics, the American Meteorological Society, the Royal Meteorological Society, and the Royal Society of the UK and according to the American Academy of Sciences 97 percent of scientists who actually do peer - reviewed research on climate Science, the American Geophysical Union, the American Institute of Physics, the American Meteorological Society, the Royal Meteorological Society, and the Royal Society of the UK and according to the American Academy of Sciences 97 percent of scientists who actually do peer - reviewed research on climate change?
Anyone who takes climate science seriously knows that the commitments under the Paris accord fall well short of those needed to give us a good chance of keeping warming below 2 °C, let alone 1.5 °C.
If your position is that global warming skeptic scientists operate under guidance from industries opposing CO2 regulation, are you prepared to provide specific proof of improper payments to those scientists, and specific proof of faults in the scientists» resulting reports that are obvious indications of industry - guided science errors?
«Given the scrutiny that climate change science is currently under, attributing biological changes to global warming should surely require the highest standards of proof.»
While there have been negotiations under way on the new agreement, there has also been an attempt to increase national commitments on greenhouse gas (ghg) emissions reductions in the short - term because mainstream science is telling nations that much greater reductions in emissions are necessary in the next few years to maintain any hope of keeping warming below 20 C, a warming limit that all nations have agreed should not be exceeded to give some hope of preventing catastrophic warming.
Collectively and pursuant to statutory authority, under the direction of these Executive Offices, the USGCRP directed an effort statutorily dedicated in part to studying the state of the science and its uncertainties surrounding the theory of «global warming» or «climate change,» ultimately producing the National Assessment.
«Climate science» as it is used by warmists implies adherence to a set of beliefs: (1) Increasing greenhouse gas concentrations will warm the Earth's surface and atmosphere; (2) Human production of CO2 is producing significant increases in CO2 concentration; (3) The rate of rise of temperature in the 20th and 21st centuries is unprecedented compared to the rates of change of temperature in the previous two millennia and this can only be due to rising greenhouse gas concentrations; (4) The climate of the 19th century was ideal and may be taken as a standard to compare against any current climate; (5) global climate models, while still not perfect, are good enough to indicate that continued use of fossil fuels at projected rates in the 21st century will cause the CO2 concentration to rise to a high level by 2100 (possibly 700 to 900 ppm); (6) The global average temperature under this condition will rise more than 3 °C from the late 19th century ideal; (7) The negative impact on humanity of such a rise will be enormous; (8) The only alternative to such a disaster is to immediately and sharply reduce CO2 emissions (reducing emissions in 2050 by 80 % compared to today's rate) and continue further reductions after 2050; (9) Even with such draconian CO2 reductions, the CO2 concentration is likely to reach at least 450 to 500 ppm by 2100 resulting in significant damage to humanity; (10) Such reductions in CO2 emissions are technically feasible and economically affordable while providing adequate energy to a growing world population that is increasingly industrializing.
I read often a Science Daily News under the Global Warming section where often I find interesting studies and articles on AGW subjects, but sometimes articles appear that really reach to blame things on AGW like some guy carrying a bowl of cereal across his living room accidently slips his big toe under a loop in his carpet, trips falls, spills his cereal, falls over a piece of furniture and exhales a abnormally large amount of CO2 followed by a burst of expletives (more CO2) leading to increased warming in his neighbWarming section where often I find interesting studies and articles on AGW subjects, but sometimes articles appear that really reach to blame things on AGW like some guy carrying a bowl of cereal across his living room accidently slips his big toe under a loop in his carpet, trips falls, spills his cereal, falls over a piece of furniture and exhales a abnormally large amount of CO2 followed by a burst of expletives (more CO2) leading to increased warming in his neighbwarming in his neighborhood.
Barnett et al. «Penetration of Human - Induced Warming into the World's Oceans» (Science, Vol 309, Issue 5732, 284 - 287, 8 July 2005) «A new study has found a «compelling agreement» between observed changes in ocean temperatures since 1960 and the changes simulated by two climate models under rising atmospheric concentrations of greenhouse gases.
Basic point being, these are people collectively operate in the realm of «climate change sociology» under the unsupportable premise that man - caused global warming is settled science, thus it is up to them to explain to the rest of us what's wrong with the mindset of skeptic climate scientists....
The NOAA study was published in June 2015 by the journal Science under the title «Possible artifacts of data biases in the recent global surface warming hiatus.»
Examples of science fiction based on devastating climate change are Ready (1998), well - meaning but scarcely noticed; Turner (1989), a story of civilization collapsing under the pressures of war and economic forces as well as global warming (noted fairly widely for its literary quality); and, by two of the field's major authors, Silverberg (1994)(little noted), emphasizing the greed, stupidity and ambitions that were bringing vast destruction through ozone as well as global warming, and Sterling (1995), where colossal storms mingle with stormy political conspiracy.
Evolutionary ecologist Dr Ally Phillimore, of the university's school of biological sciences, said: «We know that birds use spring temperatures to adjust the timing of egg - laying, and the big question is whether this flexibility will allow birds to lay at the right time under future warmer conditions.»
Cherry, the author of many children's books on the environment, and Braasch, a photojournalist and the author of Earth Under Fire, a book on global warming for grown - ups, also offer science lessons that students can apply to any research inquiry.
«Nobel Prize winner Sir Paul Nurse examines why science appears to be under attack, and why public trust in key scientific theories has been eroded — from the theory that man - made climate change is warming our planet, to the safety of GM food, or that HIV causes AIDS.
Under Watson's tenure, the IPCC last year produced its third comprehensive assessment of the state of climate science, concluding that» [t] here is new and stronger evidence that most of the warming observed over the last 50 years is attributable to human activities,» and predicting that average global temperatures will rise between 3 and 10 degrees Fahrenheit by the endof the century — conclusions reaffirmed last spring at White House request by the National Academy of Sciences.
I did not say that Abelson was necessarily a global warming skeptic, though many web sites seem anxious to debunk the idea (or at least so I found out in the last couple of days), my point was that under his editorship Science was open to publishing articles whose findings were not supportive of the theory.
Filed under Climategate, Co2 Insanity, Global Warming, Science, Truth Stranger than Fiction, Weather
If we can't concede something so basic and fundamental to science (you do not, under any circumstances, publish a graph that is knowingly in error) then how are we possibly going to trust those same principles with things that aren't nearly as cut and dry (oh say things like the use of «novel» statistics to overstate one's case on previous temperatures or «novel» statistics that spread warming from one side of the Antarctic to the other)?
Did you not see the recent article in Science about what will happen to food security in the tropics under warmer - than - present conditions (here)?
via: Science Codex Ocean Dead Zones Ocean «Dead Zones» Increasing: 400 Oxygen - Deprived Areas Now Exist Tropical Dead Zones Set to Expand by 50 % Under Climate Change Corn Ethanol Worsens Gulf of Mexico Dead Zone A Primer of Global Warming - Caused Marine Dead Zones
WSJ: Concerned Scientists Reply on Global Warming NOAA: January 2012 the fourth warmest for the contiguous United States VOA: Cold Snap Slugs Europe; Thaw a Threat MSN: Cold wave hits Europe: In pictures YAHOO: Europe struggles under record cold snap WSJ: No Need to Panic About Global Warming NASA Science News: What's to Blame for Wild Weather?
So we're not congratulating Mr. Obama as much as celebrating the coming of an era where science is highly regarded rather than shunned, global warming is put under scrutiny rather than laughed off, and ideas like renewable energy and green jobs are embraced rather than ignored.
I do recommend reading «The Discovery of Global Warming» by Spencer Weart, first link under the science section of the sidebar.
The Climate Scientists» Register does just that by focusing solely on the most important of the climate science topics under debate — is human produced carbon dioxide leading to dangerous global warming, or not?»