Sentences with phrase «warming scientists need»
Morano told Reuters: «The global warming scientists need to feel and hear the public's outrage at their shenanigans like climategate... There is no advocacy of violence or hint that people should threaten them... Public outrage is healthy»
http://www.climatedepot.com/ Not exact matches
«I think we all need to be assured about the credibility and motivation of scientists onboard the global warming wagon.»
Still, the prominent climate scientist James Hansen, who gained fame after sounding the alarm over global warming in the 1980s, criticized Sanders and said shutting down the plant would increase the need for more fracked gas.
«Logistically, negotiations on the agreement's detailed rules will likely take another year or two to finalize, and all countries will need to raise the ambition of their commitments under the agreement if we're to avoid the worst impacts of climate change and reach a goal of net - zero global warming emissions by midcentury,» said Alden Meyer of the Union of Concerned Scientists.
Scientists increasingly agree that the world may need negative emissions to prevent catastrophic warming
With the U.S. Congress set to take up climate change legislation next week, Obama Administration officials today joined with leading climate scientists to emphasize that global warming is real, it's going to get worse, and that action is needed sooner rather than later.
Researchers also need to «look at what will be irretrievably lost as warming in the Arctic continues,» said report co-chair Henry Huntington, an Arctic scientist with the Pew Charitable Trusts in Eagle River, Alaska, on a conference call yesterday.
According to a sample of scientists contacted by ClimateWire, however, the revised ETS does not much alter the picture of overall planetary warming or how humanity needs to respond to it.
The scientists say these findings reinforce the need for assessing the risk of a wide - scale collapse of reef ecosystems, especially if global action on climate change fails to limit warming to 1.5?
Some scientists say that to avoid the worst consequences of climate change, that warming needs to stay under 2 °C, or 3.6 °F.
These findings, along with those from Alaska, point to global warming as the culprit, but additional work over a longer period of time is needed before scientists can be certain of that.
Prominent scientists say researchers and policy makers need to focus more on adapting to warming and on controversial geoengineering techniques to limit it
Edenhofer says that the negotiations are falling short of what is needed to address global warming and that scientists are unlikely to change that now.
Anthropogenic CO2 emissions are presently increasing every year at an accelerating rate, and it is extremely unlikely that humanity will collectively do what is necessary to not only stop that growth in CO2 emissions, but reverse it, and then reduce emissions by 80 percent or more within 5 to 10 years, which is what mainstream climate scientists say is needed to avoid the worst outcomes of anthropogenic global warming.
Then, I saw an opinion piece in The Wall Street Journal of January 27, 2012, by a group of sixteen scientists, entitled «No Need to Panic About Global Warming.»
Scientists need to explain to the public that while they continue to study the details of anthropogentic global warming and consequent climate change, that we already know enough to be certain that continued unmitigated warming will be a disaster for all humanity, and that we urgently need to phase out all fossil fuel use as quickly as possible.
Of course, journalistic ethics mandates that journalists make at least some effort to report accurately, so I agree that it needs to be emphasized that the consensus among scientists is, there is a warming trend, it appears to be anomalous, and it appears to be caused in part by human factors.
Most importantly, as long as we continue to depend on dirty fossil fuels like coal and oil to meet our energy needs, and dump 70 million tons of global warming pollution into the thin shell of atmosphere surrounding our planet, we move closer and closer to several dangerous tipping points which scientists have repeatedly warned — again just yesterday — will threaten to make it impossible for us to avoid irretrievable destruction of the conditions that make human civilization possible on this planet.
Land warms up to a shallow depth (ask a gardener, no need to trust a scientist).
The fact that Christy and Pielke Sr. are scientists allows their skeptical positions on rapid GHG driven global warming to be even harder to deal with when I attempt to inform people that rapid GHG driven global warming is happening and that humans need to act quickly to reduce GHG emissions in order to delay and to reduce the catastrophe that lies ahead due to global warming.
The Wall Street Journal has just published «Check With Climate Scientists for Views on Climate,» a rebuttal from a long list of climate researchers criticizing last week's much - discussed 16 - author op - ed article titled «No Need to Panic About Global Warming.»
* «Wall Street Journal attempts to escalate the climate wars: Teaser blurb says, «Sixteen concerned scientists: No need to panic about global warming.»»
With only 50,000 saigas left, there is an immediate need for scientists to determine how the warming world will affect these critically endangered animals.
At the inception of the Al Gore era of the global warming issue, Stephen Schneider and the Society of Environmental Journalists spotted the very thing that could stop the issue in its tracks — if the public only saw scientists contradicting each other over whether man - caused global warming was a problem, the issue would never advance as a problem in need of a solution.
If there are indeed 19000 scientists that think global warming is a «myth», I am certain that there are at LEAST 10 times that many that think it is a fact that we need to do something about it.
And not even Al Gore consider trails as something that need to be taken care of even when scientist agree that trails is worse warmer than CO2.
They also need to take an aggressive role in calling out other scientists who make dire predictions but don't really understand the science of global warming or the uncertainties.
Global warming believers need only to counter dry recitations of skeptic science material with assertions about the numbers of «IPCC scientists», declare this to be the settled consensus opinion, then claim there is leaked memo evidence proving skeptics are paid industry money to «reposition global warming as theory rather than fact» — hoodwink the public, in other words.
While the Democratic leadership of the waning 111th Congress failed to get legislation passed into law to address climate change, the House global warming committee, led by Rep. Ed Markey (D - MA), convened dozens of important hearings and briefings featuring top climate scientists and national security experts to educate Congress and the public about the need for swift action to secure America's energy independence, create clean energy jobs and mitigate climate change emissions.
What particularly interested me was the number of scientists who had been pushed out of CSIRO, or had left of their own volition, after being tightly censored in what they could say about global warming, and the emissions reductions that would be needed to stabilise the climate (the latter point is particularly sensitive since any actual number implies a target and government policy is opposed to targets).
The fact (as amply evidenced in Dr. Curry's post above) that climate scientists (at least some of them) and climate activists are in a tizzy tells us all we need to know about how certain, how settled, man - made global warming is.
In an essay «Why the Global Warming Skeptics are Wrong» in the New York Review of Books of Feb. 22, 2012, Yale professor William D. Nordhaus attempts to counter the arguments of a group of 16 prominent scientists who published an essay, «No Need to Panic about Global Warming,» in the Wall Street Journal on Jan. 27, 2012.
«This study — if you can even call it that — is exactly what the Union of Concerned Scientists said it needed to produce five years ago in order to create «wrongdoers» of global warming.
''... a large and growing number of distinguished scientists and engineers do not agree that drastic actions on global warming are needed.»
Halving our emissions is not good enough: we need to get down to zero to stay under the 2 C target that scientists and policy makers have identified as the limit beyond which global warming becomes dangerous.
It must be lean times at the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, because this poverty - stricken argument is so bloated, it needs four bandwagons to wheel it onto the pages of the New Scientist: obesity, global warming, anti-Americanism and anti-capitalism.
HONG KONG (Reuters)- Melting of the Arctic sea ice due to global warming is diluting surface waters and this is endangering some species of shellfish which need minerals in the water to form their shells and skeletons, scientists have found.
In order to avoid the most devastating impacts of global warming, climate scientists have warned that emissions of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases need to be cut in order to keep the increase in average global temperature to less than 3.6 degrees Fahrenheit (2 degrees Celsius).
One year later another spat when Schmitt was among 16 scientists signing a Wall Street Journal article: «No need to panic about global warming.
Past Speakers Oct 2 - Columbia Professor Todd Gitlin on Fossil Fuel Divestment Oct 3 - Massimo LoBuglio, Environmentalist and Social Entrepreneur Oct 4 - Dr. Radley Horton, Columbia University and co-author of the Obama Administration's Climate Assessment Report Oct 5 - Dr. Jennifer Francis, Rutgers, author of the cutting - edge theory of Arctic Ice Melt and Extreme Weather Oct 9 - Opening Night with climate prophet Dr. James Hansen, NASA scientist, who told Congress in 1988 that global warming had begun Oct 10 — Prof. Andrew Revkin, Pace, plays Climate Music post-show Oct 11 - David Levine - Co-founder and CEO of American Sustainable Business Council Oct 12 - Jaimie Cloud & Griffin Cloud Levine - Teaching Children and Youths Sustainability Oct 16 - Prof. Gerald Markowitz, John Jay College, on industry's relationship to science Oct 17 - Marielle Anzelone, Urban ecologist Oct 18 - Dr. Jannette Barth, Why Not To Frack Oct 19 - Ken Levenson, The Passive House Oct 23 - Prof. Ana Baptista, New School for Social Research, Environmental Justice and Climate Change Oct 24 - Charles Komanoff, Carbon Tax Center, on the need to tax carbon Oct 25 - Prof. Dale Jamieson, NYU, Reason in A Dark Time Oct 26 - Eve Silber and Closing Reception in honor of Father Paul Mayer
Thus, to detect a warming trend in the GMST record that exceeds a ± 2σ noise level, scientists need at least 27 years of data.
And I'm the know - nothing, but there's a couple of dozen really hotshot scientists in there, and what we're all agreed with, really, is that we're now 18 years into the global warming pause, and the sky - is - falling alarmism needs something else.
... the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, which includes more than 3,000 scientists from around the world, agrees that climate change is caused by a number of factors, including excess carbon dioxide... The Government of Alberta accepts the findings of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change and recognizes the need to reduce emissions and take immediate action to deal with the impacts of global warming.
The book's editor, respected polar scientist Paul Berkman, sees the need to re-summon the political will shown back then, so as to deal with the ultimate cross-border threat - global warming.
He said climate targets announced in the runup to the summit were boosting the chances of success — even though they fall short of what scientists say is needed to avoid dangerous levels of warming.
If the countries make good on their pledges, they will dramatically reduce the emissions scientists link to global warming, but not enough to hold temperatures to levels scientists say are needed to minimize risks of drought, flooding and other catastrophic effects.
Although there are a lot of scientists who believe that we are warming the planet, and that we need to urgently do something about, there are quite a few climate scientists who don't agree with that.
Recently, RSS satellite scientists decided they needed to proactively adjust atmospheric temperatures in order to rid the world of the widely reported global warming hiatus.
Rutan is one of 16 scientists who appended their signatures to a Wall Street Journal opinion piece titled «No Need to Panic About Global Warming.»
In the interview, Figueres discussed the need for the United States to finally sign on to a global climate treaty, the inevitability of world economies making the transition to a low - carbon future, and the need for politicians to feel the same urgency as climate scientists about the threats posed by global warming.