Pruitt said debate is not necessarily aimed at undermining the 2009 "endangerment finding," the scientific determination that carbon dioxide harms human health that formed the basis for the Democratic Obama administration's regulation of greenhouse gases. He said there may be a legal basis to challenge the finding but would prefer Congress weigh in on the matter.
For years, climate change activists have faced a wrenching dilemma: how to persuade people to care about a grave but seemingly far-off problem and win their support for policies that might pinch them immediately in utility bills and at the pump. But that calculus may be changing at a time when climatic chaos feels like a daily event rather than an airy abstraction, and storms powered by warming ocean waters wreak havoc on the mainland United States. Americans have spent weeks riveted by television footage of wrecked neighborhoods, displaced families, flattened Caribbean islands and submerged cities from Houston to Jacksonville. "The conversation is shifting," said Senator Brian Schatz, Democrat of Hawaii. "Because even if you don't believe liberals, even if you don't believe scientists, you can believe your own eyes."
Climate scientists have been trying to work out why new computer models have begun projecting a potentially much hotter future as CO2 levels rise. A new analysis gives our best idea yet – it seems to be to do with clouds. Ahead of the next major UN climate science panel reports in 2021, researchers have found their sixth generation of climate models show a much wider range for the future temperature than before, up from 1.5 to 4.5 C to 1.8 to 5.6 C. Those estimates are for when "equilibrium climate sensitivity" (ECS) occurs, a theoretical point when the climate system comes into equilibrium after CO2 levels have doubled. "There is definitely not one single common cause. But quite a lot of the models at the high end have introduced new, more sophisticated models of clouds and aerosols. That does seem to be the driver of the new, higher sensitivity," says Catherine Senior at the UK's Met Office.
March 30, 2017 --If you're a public school science teacher, you've got mail. Or if it hasn't arrived yet, it's on the way. The Heartland Institute, a Chicago-based think tank promoting public policy based on individual liberty, limited government, and free markets, has mailed 25,000 copies of its book "Why Scientists Disagree About Global Warming" and an accompanying explanatory DVD to science teachers across the United States. It plans to continue the campaign until all 200,000 K-12 science teachers in the country have a copy. As the title hints, the organization hopes to convince science teachers that the science of global warming has yet to be settled.