Ucsd research speed dating sex dating in gladstone new mexico
, 2014, 48 (23), pp 14057–14058, DOI: 10.1021/es504574v CORRECTION: The reference was originally incorrectly cited as the older (2014) paper (now numbered 2), though it was linked to the newer paper. as “an increase in the average temperature of the Earth’s atmosphere,” either by “human industry and agriculture” or by natural causes like the Earth has “experienced numerous” times “through its history.” * Some writers use the phrases “global warming” and “climate change” to mean temperature changes strictly caused by human activity.   Other writers use adjectives such as “man-made” and “anthropogenic” to distinguish between human and non-human causes.  (“Anthropogenic” means “of human origin,” and “AGW” stands for “anthropogenic global warming.”) * Just Facts’ Standards of Credibility require the use of “language that is precise and unambiguous.” Hence, when human causes are stated or implied, this research uses terms like “man-made” and “human-induced.” * The greenhouse effect is a warming effect caused by certain gases that retain heat from sunlight. Without such gases, the average surface temperature of the Earth would be below freezing, and as explained by the , “life, as we know it, would not exist.” The global warming debate is centered upon whether added greenhouse gases released by human activity will overheat the Earth and cause harmful effects. * Human activities currently release about 37 billion metric tons of CO2 per year, which equates to about 5% of natural CO2 emissions.: Curiously this new detailed study builds on a previous study by the PBL Netherlands Climate Assessment Agency, which was issued in 2014 and includes the same authors, as well as John Cook and a few others.Jose Duarte responded to that first version, pointing out that many of the people surveyed worked in mitigation and impacts of climate change, (not climate “science” per se) which artificially inflated the results..Respondents were picked because they had authored articles with the key words ‘global warming’ and/or ‘global climate change’, covering the 1991–2011 period, via the Web of Science, or were included the climate scientist database assembled by Jim Prall, or just by a survey of peer reviewed climate science articles.
But of this group (1,222 scientists), only 797 said it was “virtually certain” or “extremely likely”.
” The researchers acknowledge that skeptics may be slightly over-represented, “it is likely that viewpoints that run counter to the prevailing consensus are somewhat (i.e.
by a few percentage points) magnified in our results.” I say, given that skeptics get sacked, rarely get grants to research, and find it harder to get published, they are underrepresented in every way in the “certified” pool of publishing climate scientists.
An expert saying “I don’t know” on the certainty question is an emphatic disagreement with the IPCC 95% certainty.
The IPCC AR5 Statement: “It is extremely likely that more than half of the observed increase in global average surface temperature from 1951 to 2010 was caused by the anthropogenic increase in greenhouse gas concentrations and other anthropogenic forcings together.