Sentences with phrase «warming science which»

Not exact matches

It's a science - driven company focused on solving problems like world hunger and global warming with, for instance, drought - resistance seeds, which have been gaining market share from competitors but had to be developed over years.

And to all the people who think that science is cold and heartless with no soul or hope as opposed to religion which is warm and fuzzy and gives people hope: how many lives does science save every single day as opposed to religion; clothe people; keep them warm; let them communicate better; let them eat better and live in better safety than what religion could ever, or has ever, provided?

That was the key message of a new study recently published in the journal Science, in which American and German biologists defined the first universal principle on the combined effects of ocean warming and oxygen loss on the productivity of marine life forms.

That representation matches the public discourse around global warming, in which previous studies have shown that media characterize climate change as unsettled science with high levels of scientific uncertainty.

That's not enough to counteract an overall negative trend for the country, which, if the planet warmed by 6 °C from preindustrial levels, could suffer damage worth 6 % of its gross domestic product, the team reports today in Science.

The study, which was funded by NASA and the National Science Foundation, found lakes are warming an average of 0.61 degrees Fahrenheit (0.34 degrees Celsius) each decade.

The research published in the journal Science Advances predicts that as the oceans warm fish — which appear to be superior predators in warm water — will extend their ranges away from the equator and cause a decline in the diversity of invertebrates such as crabs, lobsters, sea urchins and whelks.

The science team obtained vital information about the physical characteristics within one large warm - water eddy, which likely originated from the North Brazil Current, and analyzed its potential influence on sub-surface ocean conditions during the passage of tropical cyclones.

The warm ocean water presently melting Totten Glacier — East Antarctica's largest glacier, which flows from the Aurora Basin — could be an early warning sign, said co-lead author Amelia Shevenell, an associate professor in the University of South Florida College of Marine Science.

Research conducted by Jin - Soo Kim and Professor Jong - Seong Kug from the Division of Environmental Science and Engineering at Pohang University of Science and Technology (POSTECH), in collaboration with Professor Su - Jong Jeong from the School of Environmental Science and Engineering at South University of Science and Technology of China, has shown that the warmer Arctic has triggered cooler winters and springs in North America, which has in turn weakened vegetation growth and lowered carbon uptake capacity in its ecosystems.

The repercussions of the findings, which were published Thursday in Science, could make it harder to hold warming to limits set during recent United Nations climate negotiations — but they're being received cautiously by other climate scientists, with questions raised over the results of the analysis.

The fishery saw unprecedented reductions in marketable wild - caught urchins after the 2014 warm blob and 2015 El Niño, which decimated kelp forests (the primary food source for urchins) throughout California,» explains Okinawa Institute of Science and Technology researcher Kirk Sato, lead author of the study.

I think your discussion about anthropogenic global warming is a little «off topic» in this blog entry, which is about due diligence in climate science, but with the permission of those running the blog, I'd like to explore it a little further.

Re # 4 Naomi Oreskes wrote an article in Science which reported on the papers about global warming published between 1993 and 2003.

«This will cause carbon loss from the soil which means an increase in carbon dioxide concentration in the atmosphere, which will further worsen global warming,» said Takeshi Ise from the Japan Agency for Marine - Earth Science and Technology.

Ayurvedic science recommends consuming only room temperature or warm beverages, which means that ice water can become an occasional indulgence rather than a regular practice.

We talk to Alexander Payne (Election, Sideways), director of the underrated science fiction comedy - drama Downsizing, starring Matt Damon, in which people choose to be shrunk down to live in miniaturized cities as a way to help with global warming and overpopulation.

Almost as quickly, some longtime critics of the Clintons and global warming science noticed that Mr. Tapper's post included the full text of the climate portion of Mr. Clinton's speech, which clearly showed the offending line had been taken out of context.

Unfortunately for policymakers and the public, while the basic science pointing to a rising human influence on climate is clear, many of the most important questions will remain surrounded by deep complexity and uncertainty for a long time to come: the pace at which seas will rise, the extent of warming from a certain buildup of greenhouse gases (climate sensitivity), the impact on hurricanes, the particular effects in particular places (what global warming means for Addis Ababa or Atlanta).

And the statement about «storms that are growing stronger with each passing hurricane season» is hard to square with the science on hurricanes in a warming world, which has gotten more nuanced of late, as we've explored here a few times.

Re # 8 (and to expand on # 13): I also think that a basic strategy of the global warming deniers is to focus on one aspect of the science over which there is some combination of real and manufactured dispute and then try to make people think that this is the one crucial piece of evidence on which the whole theory of anthropogenic warming rests... and thus that the dispute over this aspect throws the whole theory into question.

People interested in a scientific analysis of the probabilities given in the IPCC TAR should see the analysis performed by Thomas Wigley and Sarah Raper, which was published in Science magazine in 2001 («Interpretations of High Projections for Global - Mean Warming»).

Global warming is driven by greenhouse gases, which is a long - standing consensus in science.

In contrast to RealClimate and Skeptical Science, which are focused tightly on science questions, this initiative appears to be trying to both clarify the state of the science on global warming and, in the same breath, promote policies that could curb emissions of greenhouseScience, which are focused tightly on science questions, this initiative appears to be trying to both clarify the state of the science on global warming and, in the same breath, promote policies that could curb emissions of greenhousescience questions, this initiative appears to be trying to both clarify the state of the science on global warming and, in the same breath, promote policies that could curb emissions of greenhousescience on global warming and, in the same breath, promote policies that could curb emissions of greenhouse gases.

There is very little science behind the claim that a doubling of CO2 will cause one degree C. of warming — which even if true, adds up to a mere one degree C. of global warming in about 200 years, assuming CO2 levels increase 2 ppm per year, and the hypothesis is correct.

Despite a long string of years in which Republican leaders and candidates bashed global warming science, the platform adopted on July 18 has no section characterizing — one way or the other — the party's view of risks from an unabated buildup of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere.

We have those who say that this just gives more ammo to the denialists, who will (correctly) point out that our own science is telling us that we can't prevent the warming (of course, more warming is even worse, but that would be the NEXT conversation after this one); we have philosophers telling us that the planet has a fever and we are the infection which caused it; we have many, many more who continue to insist that maybe NOW we will finally undertake drastic emissions reductions.

Please post a list of the supposed benefits of global warming (GW which you also defend does not exist)-- it is so much fun to debunk junk science.

In terms of climate science I want to see more relationships between reported warming and thermodynamics, which as we all know contain immutable laws.

Bill McKibben writes on body of science pointing to a very low «safe» long - term threshold for carbon dioxide concentrations — 350 parts per million — which was hit and passed in 1988, around the time McKibben and I began writing on global warming.

> 230 To elaborate on the link I posted — this is one of the editors of Reason Magazine, who has changed his mind about warming; the thread below his posting includes comments from some people who read only his posting, some who read the press release, and one or two who actually read the science on which he based his change of mind.

To me, it conveys how environmental campaigners, in trying to engage a public for which global warming has little salience, may be helping sustain the still - common view that greenhouse - driven warming remains uncertain science.

The Skeptical Science site refers to a paper by Flanner in 2009, a summary of which can be found here http://www.cgd.ucar.edu/tss/ahf/, that shows the direct heat from burning fossil fuels is just 1 % of the effect of the CO2 produced by this burning on the absorption of heat by the atmosphere from the sun, i.e. global warming.

The positivist scientism that you call natural science and contrast with my devotion to dialectical materialism is not magical enough to convert me to the article of faith that is the theory of global warming, which is incompatible with current knowledge.

If Mann had wanted to point to an opposite end to the spectrum of ways in which scientists can contribute to public discourse on global warming science and risks, a better choice (in my view) would have been Susan Solomon's handling of the rollout of the 2007 science report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.

It might be interesting to some readers of this site to know that Crichton's comparison of global climate change theory to eugenics in Appendix I of his novel was adapted without attribution from an essay by Richard Lindzen, «Science and Politics: Global Warming and Eugenics,» which appeared in R.W. Hahn, Ed., Risks, Costs, and Lives Saved, (American Enterprise Institute, 1996).

Climate campaigners seem to think they have a winner with this takedown of elected officials who reject global warming science, in which fake news reports talk of the turmoil and tragedy created by Hurricane Marco Rubio, Hurricane James Inhofe, Hurricane John Boehner and more.

Science 275: 957 - 960) have suggested that the upwelling of cold water in the Eastern Pacific provides a kind of thermostat which keeps the Eastern waters from warming as much as the Western warm pool waters.

A plan: See: http://climateprogress.org/2010/11/28/winning-climate-messages-combine-dire-scientific-threat-with-solutions-for-a-just-world/ «New psychological research finds that dire messages about the threat of global warming will strengthen people's acceptance of climate science when combined with solutions, which is the approach taken by leading climate activists.

Re # 4 Naomi Oreskes wrote an article in Science which reported on the papers about global warming published between 1993 and 2003.

I find it hard to draw the same conclusion in looking at my coverage, which has long included the voices of researchers challenging the predominant line of thinking on climate science, among them Roger Pielke Sr., Richard Lindzen, who was quoted in the 2006 article you read, John Christy, Ivar Giaever (a Nobelist who rejects the science pointing to dangerous greenhouse warming) and others.

But the newly obtained documents show that Dr. Carlin's highly skeptical views on global warming, which have been known for more than a decade within the small unit where he works, have been repeatedly challenged by scientists inside and outside the E.P.A.; that he holds a doctorate in economics, not in atmospheric science or climatology; that he has never been assigned to work on climate change; and that his comments on the endangerment finding were a product of rushed and at times shoddy scholarship, as he acknowledged Thursday in an interview.

The» top ten» arguments employed by the relatively few deniers with credentials in any aspect of climate - change science (which arguments include «the sun is doing it», «Earth's climate was changing before there were people here», «climate is changing on Mars but there are no SUVs there», «the Earth hasn't been warming since 1998», «thermometer records showing heating are contaminated by the urban - heat - island effect», «satellite measurements show cooling rather than warming») have all been shown in the serious scientific literature to be wrong or irrelevant, but explaining their defects requires at least a paragraph or two for each one.

Sadly, in recent years we have become accustomed to a ritual in which the publication of each new result on anthropogenic climate change is greeted by a flurry of activity from industry - funded lobby groups, think tanks and PR professionals, who try to discredit the science and confuse the public about global warming.

Like I say, you see a richness of behaviour in the models including in some occasions behaviour that at first sight looks not dissimilar to that highlighted in the observations by the Thompson paper and this on top of the «external control» as we called it in our 2000 paper in Science of the external forcings in a particular model which drives much of the multi-decadal hemispheric response in these models and which, in terms of the overall global warming response, is dominated by greenhouse gases.

I think that policymakers would want to see the science of global warming stated as clearly and explicitly as possible, irrespective of the technical level at which it is presented.

And the new Yale / George Mason poll, which is the first I have seen to prove the views of Tea Partiers, shows that Tea Party members (12 % of the public) feel they are very well informed about climate science and more than half think global warming will never hurt anyone.

You seem to have steered clear of the questions in which science intersects with policy (global warming is happening but it's not calamitous; the costs estimated for cutting emissions exceed the overinflated costs of adaptation, etc...).

Indeed, throughout the Science Bulletin paper on Why models run hot, it is self - evident not only that I and my co-authors, including Dr Soon, accept that our returning some CO2 to the atmosphere from which it originally came will cause some global warming, but also that we are thoroughly familiar with the scientific reasons why — all other things being equal — more CO2 in the atmosphere will cause some warming.

It's certainly true that the global warming problem has meant more funding for climate science, but there's only so much in the budget, and much of this money has come at the expense of other fields which are no longer given priority status.