Scientific Integrity and Public Trust: The Science Behind Federal Policies and Mandates : Case Study 2--climate Models and Projections of Potential Impacts of Global Climate Change : Hearing Before the Subcommittee on Energy and Environment of the Committee on Science, U.S. House of Representatives, One Hundred Fourth Congress, First Session, November 16, 1995, Volume 4U.S. Government Printing Office, 1996 - 1190 pages |
From inside the book
Results 1-5 of 99
Page 5
... given a very good example of the very thing that you are asking , and I do not understand why your outrage now has not gone on to requesting information from Mr. Gore's of- fice of why his office required the firing of Mr. Will Harper ...
... given a very good example of the very thing that you are asking , and I do not understand why your outrage now has not gone on to requesting information from Mr. Gore's of- fice of why his office required the firing of Mr. Will Harper ...
Page 9
... Given the complexity of the climate processes that need to be in- corporated in the models , scientists believe that significant reductions of the uncer- tainties in projecting changes and trends in the climate will require sustained ef ...
... Given the complexity of the climate processes that need to be in- corporated in the models , scientists believe that significant reductions of the uncer- tainties in projecting changes and trends in the climate will require sustained ef ...
Page 25
... given my pro- motion seminar , so hopefully that will change in a very short pe- riod . Controversy surrounding the issue of global warming is a classic example of what I think is the normal and creative scientific ten- sion that exists ...
... given my pro- motion seminar , so hopefully that will change in a very short pe- riod . Controversy surrounding the issue of global warming is a classic example of what I think is the normal and creative scientific ten- sion that exists ...
Page 39
... given in line 13. Probably best to eliminate the statement on line 13 . Lines 37-38 . The exact same mistake is repeated . .15 to .25 ° / decade gives a warming of from .75 to 1.25 ° , not the " between 1 and 2.5 ° " given in line 38 ...
... given in line 13. Probably best to eliminate the statement on line 13 . Lines 37-38 . The exact same mistake is repeated . .15 to .25 ° / decade gives a warming of from .75 to 1.25 ° , not the " between 1 and 2.5 ° " given in line 38 ...
Page 44
... given range is not right . According to figure 7 , the range with aerosols is 0.8 to 2.4 ° In reality , it should be somewhat less than 0.8 because the lower limit in the aerosol and non aerosol models cannot logically be the same ...
... given range is not right . According to figure 7 , the range with aerosols is 0.8 to 2.4 ° In reality , it should be somewhat less than 0.8 because the lower limit in the aerosol and non aerosol models cannot logically be the same ...
Other editions - View all
Common terms and phrases
activities adaptation aerosols AGBM agricultural analysis anthropogenic areas assumptions atmosphere baseline biomass bottom-up carbon dioxide carbon sequestration carbon tax climate change climate models climate system CO₂ emissions concentrations Convention cost-effective costs Dana Rohrabacher decades developing countries economic ecosystems effects emission reduction energy efficiency environmental estimates expected factors forest forestry fossil fuels future gases Gigagrams Global Change global climate global warming greenhouse gas emissions growth human impacts implementation important improved increase industrial inventory IPCC IPCC Working Group issues land methane mitigation ocean OECD options Panel Parties policies and measures potential predictions production projections radiative forcing range reduce emissions regional response ROHRABACHER SBSTA scenarios Science scientific sea level rise Second Assessment Report secretariat sector simulations studies Summary for Policymakers Table technical technologies temperature top-down transportation uncertainties understanding United USGCRP