Question: Who was Chairman of the Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations?

Answer: Ed Whitfield

<hl> On 23 June 2005, Rep. Joe Barton, chairman of the House Committee on Energy and Commerce wrote joint letters with Ed Whitfield , Chairman of the Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations demanding full records on climate research, as well as personal information about their finances and careers, from Mann, Bradley and Hughes. <hl> Sherwood Boehlert, chairman of the House Science Committee, said this was a "misguided and illegitimate investigation" apparently aimed at intimidating scientists, and at his request the U.S. National Academy of Sciences arranged for its National Research Council to set up a special investigation. The National Research Council's report agreed that there were some statistical failings, but these had little effect on the graph, which was generally correct. In a 2006 letter to Nature, Mann, Bradley, and Hughes pointed out that their original article had said that "more widespread high-resolution data are needed before more confident conclusions can be reached" and that the uncertainties were "the point of the article".

On 23 June 2005, Rep. Joe Barton, chairman of the House Committee on Energy and Commerce wrote joint letters with <hl> Ed Whitfield <hl>, Chairman of the Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations demanding full records on climate research, as well as personal information about their finances and careers, from Mann, Bradley and Hughes. Sherwood Boehlert, chairman of the House Science Committee, said this was a "misguided and illegitimate investigation" apparently aimed at intimidating scientists, and at his request the U.S. National Academy of Sciences arranged for its National Research Council to set up a special investigation. The National Research Council's report agreed that there were some statistical failings, but these had little effect on the graph, which was generally correct. In a 2006 letter to Nature, Mann, Bradley, and Hughes pointed out that their original article had said that "more widespread high-resolution data are needed before more confident conclusions can be reached" and that the uncertainties were "the point of the article".

On 23 June 2005, Rep. Joe Barton, chairman of the House Committee on Energy and Commerce wrote joint letters with <hl> Ed Whitfield <hl> , Chairman of the Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations demanding full records on climate research, as well as personal information about their finances and careers, from Mann, Bradley and Hughes.


Question: When did Barton and Whitfield demand climate research records?

On 23 June 2005, Rep. Joe Barton, chairman of the House Committee on Energy and Commerce wrote joint letters with Ed Whitfield, Chairman of the Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations demanding full records on climate research, as well as personal information about their finances and careers, from Mann, Bradley and Hughes. Sherwood Boehlert, chairman of the House Science Committee, said this was a "misguided and illegitimate investigation" apparently aimed at intimidating scientists, and at his request the U.S. National Academy of Sciences arranged for its National Research Council to set up a special investigation. The National Research Council's report agreed that there were some statistical failings, but these had little effect on the graph, which was generally correct. In a 2006 letter to Nature, Mann, Bradley, and Hughes pointed out that their original article had said that "more widespread high-resolution data are needed before more confident conclusions can be reached" and that the uncertainties were "the point of the article".

Answer: 23 June 2005

<hl> On 23 June 2005 , Rep. Joe Barton, chairman of the House Committee on Energy and Commerce wrote joint letters with Ed Whitfield, Chairman of the Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations demanding full records on climate research, as well as personal information about their finances and careers, from Mann, Bradley and Hughes. <hl> Sherwood Boehlert, chairman of the House Science Committee, said this was a "misguided and illegitimate investigation" apparently aimed at intimidating scientists, and at his request the U.S. National Academy of Sciences arranged for its National Research Council to set up a special investigation. The National Research Council's report agreed that there were some statistical failings, but these had little effect on the graph, which was generally correct. In a 2006 letter to Nature, Mann, Bradley, and Hughes pointed out that their original article had said that "more widespread high-resolution data are needed before more confident conclusions can be reached" and that the uncertainties were "the point of the article".

On <hl> 23 June 2005 <hl>, Rep. Joe Barton, chairman of the House Committee on Energy and Commerce wrote joint letters with Ed Whitfield, Chairman of the Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations demanding full records on climate research, as well as personal information about their finances and careers, from Mann, Bradley and Hughes. Sherwood Boehlert, chairman of the House Science Committee, said this was a "misguided and illegitimate investigation" apparently aimed at intimidating scientists, and at his request the U.S. National Academy of Sciences arranged for its National Research Council to set up a special investigation. The National Research Council's report agreed that there were some statistical failings, but these had little effect on the graph, which was generally correct. In a 2006 letter to Nature, Mann, Bradley, and Hughes pointed out that their original article had said that "more widespread high-resolution data are needed before more confident conclusions can be reached" and that the uncertainties were "the point of the article".

On <hl> 23 June 2005 <hl> , Rep. Joe Barton, chairman of the House Committee on Energy and Commerce wrote joint letters with Ed Whitfield, Chairman of the Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations demanding full records on climate research, as well as personal information about their finances and careers, from Mann, Bradley and Hughes.


Question: Who was chairman of the House Science Committee?

Answer: Sherwood Boehlert

On 23 June 2005, Rep. Joe Barton, chairman of the House Committee on Energy and Commerce wrote joint letters with Ed Whitfield, Chairman of the Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations demanding full records on climate research, as well as personal information about their finances and careers, from Mann, Bradley and Hughes. <hl> Sherwood Boehlert , chairman of the House Science Committee, said this was a "misguided and illegitimate investigation" apparently aimed at intimidating scientists, and at his request the U.S. National Academy of Sciences arranged for its National Research Council to set up a special investigation. <hl> The National Research Council's report agreed that there were some statistical failings, but these had little effect on the graph, which was generally correct. In a 2006 letter to Nature, Mann, Bradley, and Hughes pointed out that their original article had said that "more widespread high-resolution data are needed before more confident conclusions can be reached" and that the uncertainties were "the point of the article".

On 23 June 2005, Rep. Joe Barton, chairman of the House Committee on Energy and Commerce wrote joint letters with Ed Whitfield, Chairman of the Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations demanding full records on climate research, as well as personal information about their finances and careers, from Mann, Bradley and Hughes. <hl> Sherwood Boehlert <hl>, chairman of the House Science Committee, said this was a "misguided and illegitimate investigation" apparently aimed at intimidating scientists, and at his request the U.S. National Academy of Sciences arranged for its National Research Council to set up a special investigation. The National Research Council's report agreed that there were some statistical failings, but these had little effect on the graph, which was generally correct. In a 2006 letter to Nature, Mann, Bradley, and Hughes pointed out that their original article had said that "more widespread high-resolution data are needed before more confident conclusions can be reached" and that the uncertainties were "the point of the article".

<hl> Sherwood Boehlert <hl> , chairman of the House Science Committee, said this was a "misguided and illegitimate investigation" apparently aimed at intimidating scientists, and at his request the U.S. National Academy of Sciences arranged for its National Research Council to set up a special investigation.


Question: Who said Barton's investigation was "misguided and illegitimate"?

Answer: Sherwood Boehlert

On 23 June 2005, Rep. Joe Barton, chairman of the House Committee on Energy and Commerce wrote joint letters with Ed Whitfield, Chairman of the Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations demanding full records on climate research, as well as personal information about their finances and careers, from Mann, Bradley and Hughes. <hl> Sherwood Boehlert , chairman of the House Science Committee, said this was a "misguided and illegitimate investigation" apparently aimed at intimidating scientists, and at his request the U.S. National Academy of Sciences arranged for its National Research Council to set up a special investigation. <hl> The National Research Council's report agreed that there were some statistical failings, but these had little effect on the graph, which was generally correct. In a 2006 letter to Nature, Mann, Bradley, and Hughes pointed out that their original article had said that "more widespread high-resolution data are needed before more confident conclusions can be reached" and that the uncertainties were "the point of the article".

On 23 June 2005, Rep. Joe Barton, chairman of the House Committee on Energy and Commerce wrote joint letters with Ed Whitfield, Chairman of the Subcommittee on Oversight and Investigations demanding full records on climate research, as well as personal information about their finances and careers, from Mann, Bradley and Hughes. <hl> Sherwood Boehlert <hl>, chairman of the House Science Committee, said this was a "misguided and illegitimate investigation" apparently aimed at intimidating scientists, and at his request the U.S. National Academy of Sciences arranged for its National Research Council to set up a special investigation. The National Research Council's report agreed that there were some statistical failings, but these had little effect on the graph, which was generally correct. In a 2006 letter to Nature, Mann, Bradley, and Hughes pointed out that their original article had said that "more widespread high-resolution data are needed before more confident conclusions can be reached" and that the uncertainties were "the point of the article".

<hl> Sherwood Boehlert <hl> , chairman of the House Science Committee, said this was a "misguided and illegitimate investigation" apparently aimed at intimidating scientists, and at his request the U.S. National Academy of Sciences arranged for its National Research Council to set up a special investigation.


Question: When was the IPCC Third Assessment Report published?

The IPCC Fourth Assessment Report (AR4) published in 2007 featured a graph showing 12 proxy based temperature reconstructions, including the three highlighted in the 2001 Third Assessment Report (TAR); Mann, Bradley & Hughes 1999 as before, Jones et al. 1998 and Briffa 2000 had both been calibrated by newer studies. In addition, analysis of the Medieval Warm Period cited reconstructions by Crowley & Lowery 2000 (as cited in the TAR) and Osborn & Briffa 2006. Ten of these 14 reconstructions covered 1,000 years or longer. Most reconstructions shared some data series, particularly tree ring data, but newer reconstructions used additional data and covered a wider area, using a variety of statistical methods. The section discussed the divergence problem affecting certain tree ring data.

Answer: 2001

<hl> The IPCC Fourth Assessment Report (AR4) published in 2007 featured a graph showing 12 proxy based temperature reconstructions, including the three highlighted in the 2001 Third Assessment Report (TAR); Mann, Bradley & Hughes 1999 as before, Jones et al. 1998 and Briffa 2000 had both been calibrated by newer studies. <hl> In addition, analysis of the Medieval Warm Period cited reconstructions by Crowley & Lowery 2000 (as cited in the TAR) and Osborn & Briffa 2006. Ten of these 14 reconstructions covered 1,000 years or longer. Most reconstructions shared some data series, particularly tree ring data, but newer reconstructions used additional data and covered a wider area, using a variety of statistical methods. The section discussed the divergence problem affecting certain tree ring data.

The IPCC Fourth Assessment Report (AR4) published in 2007 featured a graph showing 12 proxy based temperature reconstructions, including the three highlighted in the <hl> 2001 <hl> Third Assessment Report (TAR); Mann, Bradley & Hughes 1999 as before, Jones et al. 1998 and Briffa 2000 had both been calibrated by newer studies. In addition, analysis of the Medieval Warm Period cited reconstructions by Crowley & Lowery 2000 (as cited in the TAR) and Osborn & Briffa 2006. Ten of these 14 reconstructions covered 1,000 years or longer. Most reconstructions shared some data series, particularly tree ring data, but newer reconstructions used additional data and covered a wider area, using a variety of statistical methods. The section discussed the divergence problem affecting certain tree ring data.


Question: When was the IPCC Fourth Assessment Report published?

Answer: 2007

<hl> The IPCC Fourth Assessment Report (AR4) published in 2007 featured a graph showing 12 proxy based temperature reconstructions, including the three highlighted in the 2001 Third Assessment Report (TAR); Mann, Bradley & Hughes 1999 as before, Jones et al. 1998 and Briffa 2000 had both been calibrated by newer studies. <hl> In addition, analysis of the Medieval Warm Period cited reconstructions by Crowley & Lowery 2000 (as cited in the TAR) and Osborn & Briffa 2006. Ten of these 14 reconstructions covered 1,000 years or longer. Most reconstructions shared some data series, particularly tree ring data, but newer reconstructions used additional data and covered a wider area, using a variety of statistical methods. The section discussed the divergence problem affecting certain tree ring data.

The IPCC Fourth Assessment Report (AR4) published in <hl> 2007 <hl> featured a graph showing 12 proxy based temperature reconstructions, including the three highlighted in the 2001 Third Assessment Report (TAR); Mann, Bradley & Hughes 1999 as before, Jones et al. 1998 and Briffa 2000 had both been calibrated by newer studies. In addition, analysis of the Medieval Warm Period cited reconstructions by Crowley & Lowery 2000 (as cited in the TAR) and Osborn & Briffa 2006. Ten of these 14 reconstructions covered 1,000 years or longer. Most reconstructions shared some data series, particularly tree ring data, but newer reconstructions used additional data and covered a wider area, using a variety of statistical methods. The section discussed the divergence problem affecting certain tree ring data.


Question: How many Medieval Warm Period reconstructions covered 1,000+ years?

Answer: Ten

The IPCC Fourth Assessment Report (AR4) published in 2007 featured a graph showing 12 proxy based temperature reconstructions, including the three highlighted in the 2001 Third Assessment Report (TAR); Mann, Bradley & Hughes 1999 as before, Jones et al. 1998 and Briffa 2000 had both been calibrated by newer studies. In addition, analysis of the Medieval Warm Period cited reconstructions by Crowley & Lowery 2000 (as cited in the TAR) and Osborn & Briffa 2006. <hl> Ten of these 14 reconstructions covered 1,000 years or longer. <hl> Most reconstructions shared some data series, particularly tree ring data, but newer reconstructions used additional data and covered a wider area, using a variety of statistical methods. The section discussed the divergence problem affecting certain tree ring data.

The IPCC Fourth Assessment Report (AR4) published in 2007 featured a graph showing 12 proxy based temperature reconstructions, including the three highlighted in the 2001 Third Assessment Report (TAR); Mann, Bradley & Hughes 1999 as before, Jones et al. 1998 and Briffa 2000 had both been calibrated by newer studies. In addition, analysis of the Medieval Warm Period cited reconstructions by Crowley & Lowery 2000 (as cited in the TAR) and Osborn & Briffa 2006. <hl> Ten <hl> of these 14 reconstructions covered 1,000 years or longer. Most reconstructions shared some data series, particularly tree ring data, but newer reconstructions used additional data and covered a wider area, using a variety of statistical methods. The section discussed the divergence problem affecting certain tree ring data.


Question: What problem did some tree ring data have?

Answer: divergence

The IPCC Fourth Assessment Report (AR4) published in 2007 featured a graph showing 12 proxy based temperature reconstructions, including the three highlighted in the 2001 Third Assessment Report (TAR); Mann, Bradley & Hughes 1999 as before, Jones et al. 1998 and Briffa 2000 had both been calibrated by newer studies. In addition, analysis of the Medieval Warm Period cited reconstructions by Crowley & Lowery 2000 (as cited in the TAR) and Osborn & Briffa 2006. Ten of these 14 reconstructions covered 1,000 years or longer. Most reconstructions shared some data series, particularly tree ring data, but newer reconstructions used additional data and covered a wider area, using a variety of statistical methods. <hl> The section discussed the divergence problem affecting certain tree ring data. <hl>

The IPCC Fourth Assessment Report (AR4) published in 2007 featured a graph showing 12 proxy based temperature reconstructions, including the three highlighted in the 2001 Third Assessment Report (TAR); Mann, Bradley & Hughes 1999 as before, Jones et al. 1998 and Briffa 2000 had both been calibrated by newer studies. In addition, analysis of the Medieval Warm Period cited reconstructions by Crowley & Lowery 2000 (as cited in the TAR) and Osborn & Briffa 2006. Ten of these 14 reconstructions covered 1,000 years or longer. Most reconstructions shared some data series, particularly tree ring data, but newer reconstructions used additional data and covered a wider area, using a variety of statistical methods. The section discussed the <hl> divergence <hl> problem affecting certain tree ring data.


Question: How many Medieval Warm Period reconstructions were used?

Answer: 14

The IPCC Fourth Assessment Report (AR4) published in 2007 featured a graph showing 12 proxy based temperature reconstructions, including the three highlighted in the 2001 Third Assessment Report (TAR); Mann, Bradley & Hughes 1999 as before, Jones et al. 1998 and Briffa 2000 had both been calibrated by newer studies. In addition, analysis of the Medieval Warm Period cited reconstructions by Crowley & Lowery 2000 (as cited in the TAR) and Osborn & Briffa 2006. <hl> Ten of these 14 reconstructions covered 1,000 years or longer. <hl> Most reconstructions shared some data series, particularly tree ring data, but newer reconstructions used additional data and covered a wider area, using a variety of statistical methods. The section discussed the divergence problem affecting certain tree ring data.

The IPCC Fourth Assessment Report (AR4) published in 2007 featured a graph showing 12 proxy based temperature reconstructions, including the three highlighted in the 2001 Third Assessment Report (TAR); Mann, Bradley & Hughes 1999 as before, Jones et al. 1998 and Briffa 2000 had both been calibrated by newer studies. In addition, analysis of the Medieval Warm Period cited reconstructions by Crowley & Lowery 2000 (as cited in the TAR) and Osborn & Briffa 2006. Ten of these <hl> 14 <hl> reconstructions covered 1,000 years or longer. Most reconstructions shared some data series, particularly tree ring data, but newer reconstructions used additional data and covered a wider area, using a variety of statistical methods. The section discussed the divergence problem affecting certain tree ring data.


Question: When was a study published confirming the 2001 IPCC projections?

On 1 February 2007, the eve of the publication of IPCC's major report on climate, a study was published suggesting that temperatures and sea levels have been rising at or above the maximum rates proposed during the last IPCC report in 2001. The study compared IPCC 2001 projections on temperature and sea level change with observations. Over the six years studied, the actual temperature rise was near the top end of the range given by IPCC's 2001 projection, and the actual sea level rise was above the top of the range of the IPCC projection.

Answer: 1 February 2007

<hl> On 1 February 2007 , the eve of the publication of IPCC's major report on climate, a study was published suggesting that temperatures and sea levels have been rising at or above the maximum rates proposed during the last IPCC report in 2001. <hl> The study compared IPCC 2001 projections on temperature and sea level change with observations. Over the six years studied, the actual temperature rise was near the top end of the range given by IPCC's 2001 projection, and the actual sea level rise was above the top of the range of the IPCC projection.

On <hl> 1 February 2007 <hl>, the eve of the publication of IPCC's major report on climate, a study was published suggesting that temperatures and sea levels have been rising at or above the maximum rates proposed during the last IPCC report in 2001. The study compared IPCC 2001 projections on temperature and sea level change with observations. Over the six years studied, the actual temperature rise was near the top end of the range given by IPCC's 2001 projection, and the actual sea level rise was above the top of the range of the IPCC projection.

On <hl> 1 February 2007 <hl> , the eve of the publication of IPCC's major report on climate, a study was published suggesting that temperatures and sea levels have been rising at or above the maximum rates proposed during the last IPCC report in 2001.


Question: How did the 2001 IPCC report compare to reality for 2001-2006?

Answer: temperatures and sea levels have been rising at or above the maximum rates

<hl> On 1 February 2007, the eve of the publication of IPCC's major report on climate, a study was published suggesting that temperatures and sea levels have been rising at or above the maximum rates proposed during the last IPCC report in 2001. <hl> The study compared IPCC 2001 projections on temperature and sea level change with observations. Over the six years studied, the actual temperature rise was near the top end of the range given by IPCC's 2001 projection, and the actual sea level rise was above the top of the range of the IPCC projection.

On 1 February 2007, the eve of the publication of IPCC's major report on climate, a study was published suggesting that <hl> temperatures and sea levels have been rising at or above the maximum rates <hl> proposed during the last IPCC report in 2001. The study compared IPCC 2001 projections on temperature and sea level change with observations. Over the six years studied, the actual temperature rise was near the top end of the range given by IPCC's 2001 projection, and the actual sea level rise was above the top of the range of the IPCC projection.


Question: How did the 2001 IPCC report compare to reality on temperature levels?

Answer: actual temperature rise was near the top end of the range given

On 1 February 2007, the eve of the publication of IPCC's major report on climate, a study was published suggesting that temperatures and sea levels have been rising at or above the maximum rates proposed during the last IPCC report in 2001. The study compared IPCC 2001 projections on temperature and sea level change with observations. <hl> Over the six years studied, the actual temperature rise was near the top end of the range given by IPCC's 2001 projection, and the actual sea level rise was above the top of the range of the IPCC projection. <hl>

On 1 February 2007, the eve of the publication of IPCC's major report on climate, a study was published suggesting that temperatures and sea levels have been rising at or above the maximum rates proposed during the last IPCC report in 2001. The study compared IPCC 2001 projections on temperature and sea level change with observations. Over the six years studied, the <hl> actual temperature rise was near the top end of the range given <hl> by IPCC's 2001 projection, and the actual sea level rise was above the top of the range of the IPCC projection.


Question: How did the 2001 IPCC report compare to reality on sea levels?

Answer: actual sea level rise was above the top of the range

On 1 February 2007, the eve of the publication of IPCC's major report on climate, a study was published suggesting that temperatures and sea levels have been rising at or above the maximum rates proposed during the last IPCC report in 2001. The study compared IPCC 2001 projections on temperature and sea level change with observations. <hl> Over the six years studied, the actual temperature rise was near the top end of the range given by IPCC's 2001 projection, and the actual sea level rise was above the top of the range of the IPCC projection. <hl>

On 1 February 2007, the eve of the publication of IPCC's major report on climate, a study was published suggesting that temperatures and sea levels have been rising at or above the maximum rates proposed during the last IPCC report in 2001. The study compared IPCC 2001 projections on temperature and sea level change with observations. Over the six years studied, the actual temperature rise was near the top end of the range given by IPCC's 2001 projection, and the <hl> actual sea level rise was above the top of the range <hl> of the IPCC projection.


Question: What danger did the IPCC understate?

Another example of scientific research which suggests that previous estimates by the IPCC, far from overstating dangers and risks, have actually understated them is a study on projected rises in sea levels. When the researchers' analysis was "applied to the possible scenarios outlined by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), the researchers found that in 2100 sea levels would be 0.5–1.4 m [50–140 cm] above 1990 levels. These values are much greater than the 9–88 cm as projected by the IPCC itself in its Third Assessment Report, published in 2001". This may have been due, in part, to the expanding human understanding of climate.

Answer: projected rises in sea levels

<hl> Another example of scientific research which suggests that previous estimates by the IPCC, far from overstating dangers and risks, have actually understated them is a study on projected rises in sea levels . <hl> When the researchers' analysis was "applied to the possible scenarios outlined by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), the researchers found that in 2100 sea levels would be 0.5–1.4 m [50–140 cm] above 1990 levels. These values are much greater than the 9–88 cm as projected by the IPCC itself in its Third Assessment Report, published in 2001". This may have been due, in part, to the expanding human understanding of climate.

Another example of scientific research which suggests that previous estimates by the IPCC, far from overstating dangers and risks, have actually understated them is a study on <hl> projected rises in sea levels <hl>. When the researchers' analysis was "applied to the possible scenarios outlined by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), the researchers found that in 2100 sea levels would be 0.5–1.4 m [50–140 cm] above 1990 levels. These values are much greater than the 9–88 cm as projected by the IPCC itself in its Third Assessment Report, published in 2001". This may have been due, in part, to the expanding human understanding of climate.

Another example of scientific research which suggests that previous estimates by the IPCC, far from overstating dangers and risks, have actually understated them is a study on <hl> projected rises in sea levels <hl> .


Question: How much did the IPCC Third Assessment Report say sea levels will rise from 1990 to 2100?

Answer: 9–88 cm

Another example of scientific research which suggests that previous estimates by the IPCC, far from overstating dangers and risks, have actually understated them is a study on projected rises in sea levels. When the researchers' analysis was "applied to the possible scenarios outlined by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), the researchers found that in 2100 sea levels would be 0.5–1.4 m [50–140 cm] above 1990 levels. <hl> These values are much greater than the 9–88 cm as projected by the IPCC itself in its Third Assessment Report, published in 2001". <hl> This may have been due, in part, to the expanding human understanding of climate.

Another example of scientific research which suggests that previous estimates by the IPCC, far from overstating dangers and risks, have actually understated them is a study on projected rises in sea levels. When the researchers' analysis was "applied to the possible scenarios outlined by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), the researchers found that in 2100 sea levels would be 0.5–1.4 m [50–140 cm] above 1990 levels. These values are much greater than the <hl> 9–88 cm <hl> as projected by the IPCC itself in its Third Assessment Report, published in 2001". This may have been due, in part, to the expanding human understanding of climate.


Question: How much do researchers now think sea levels will rise from 1990 to 2100?

Answer: 50–140 cm

[ 50–140 cm ] above 1990 levels.

Another example of scientific research which suggests that previous estimates by the IPCC, far from overstating dangers and risks, have actually understated them is a study on projected rises in sea levels. When the researchers' analysis was "applied to the possible scenarios outlined by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), the researchers found that in 2100 sea levels would be 0.5–1.4 m <hl> [ 50–140 cm ] above 1990 levels. <hl> These values are much greater than the 9–88 cm as projected by the IPCC itself in its Third Assessment Report, published in 2001". This may have been due, in part, to the expanding human understanding of climate.

Another example of scientific research which suggests that previous estimates by the IPCC, far from overstating dangers and risks, have actually understated them is a study on projected rises in sea levels. When the researchers' analysis was "applied to the possible scenarios outlined by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), the researchers found that in 2100 sea levels would be 0.5–1.4 m [<hl> 50–140 cm <hl>] above 1990 levels. These values are much greater than the 9–88 cm as projected by the IPCC itself in its Third Assessment Report, published in 2001". This may have been due, in part, to the expanding human understanding of climate.

[ <hl> 50–140 cm <hl> ] above 1990 levels.


Question: When was the Third Assessment Report published?

Answer: 2001

Another example of scientific research which suggests that previous estimates by the IPCC, far from overstating dangers and risks, have actually understated them is a study on projected rises in sea levels. When the researchers' analysis was "applied to the possible scenarios outlined by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), the researchers found that in 2100 sea levels would be 0.5–1.4 m [50–140 cm] above 1990 levels. <hl> These values are much greater than the 9–88 cm as projected by the IPCC itself in its Third Assessment Report, published in 2001 ". <hl> This may have been due, in part, to the expanding human understanding of climate.

Another example of scientific research which suggests that previous estimates by the IPCC, far from overstating dangers and risks, have actually understated them is a study on projected rises in sea levels. When the researchers' analysis was "applied to the possible scenarios outlined by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), the researchers found that in 2100 sea levels would be 0.5–1.4 m [50–140 cm] above 1990 levels. These values are much greater than the 9–88 cm as projected by the IPCC itself in its Third Assessment Report, published in <hl> 2001 <hl>". This may have been due, in part, to the expanding human understanding of climate.

These values are much greater than the 9–88 cm as projected by the IPCC itself in its Third Assessment Report, published in <hl> 2001 <hl> ".


Question: What role did Michael Oppenheimer have in the IPCC's reports?

Michael Oppenheimer, a long-time participant in the IPCC and coordinating lead author of the Fifth Assessment Report conceded in Science Magazine's State of the Planet 2008-2009 some limitations of the IPCC consensus approach and asks for concurring, smaller assessments of special problems instead of the large scale approach as in the previous IPCC assessment reports. It has become more important to provide a broader exploration of uncertainties. Others see as well mixed blessings of the drive for consensus within the IPCC process and ask to include dissenting or minority positions or to improve statements about uncertainties.

Answer: coordinating lead author of the Fifth Assessment Report

<hl> Michael Oppenheimer, a long-time participant in the IPCC and coordinating lead author of the Fifth Assessment Report conceded in Science Magazine's State of the Planet 2008-2009 some limitations of the IPCC consensus approach and asks for concurring, smaller assessments of special problems instead of the large scale approach as in the previous IPCC assessment reports. <hl> It has become more important to provide a broader exploration of uncertainties. Others see as well mixed blessings of the drive for consensus within the IPCC process and ask to include dissenting or minority positions or to improve statements about uncertainties.

Michael Oppenheimer, a long-time participant in the IPCC and <hl> coordinating lead author of the Fifth Assessment Report <hl> conceded in Science Magazine's State of the Planet 2008-2009 some limitations of the IPCC consensus approach and asks for concurring, smaller assessments of special problems instead of the large scale approach as in the previous IPCC assessment reports. It has become more important to provide a broader exploration of uncertainties. Others see as well mixed blessings of the drive for consensus within the IPCC process and ask to include dissenting or minority positions or to improve statements about uncertainties.


Question: Who published the State of the Planet 2008-2009 report?

Answer: Science Magazine

<hl> Michael Oppenheimer, a long-time participant in the IPCC and coordinating lead author of the Fifth Assessment Report conceded in Science Magazine 's State of the Planet 2008-2009 some limitations of the IPCC consensus approach and asks for concurring, smaller assessments of special problems instead of the large scale approach as in the previous IPCC assessment reports. <hl> It has become more important to provide a broader exploration of uncertainties. Others see as well mixed blessings of the drive for consensus within the IPCC process and ask to include dissenting or minority positions or to improve statements about uncertainties.

Michael Oppenheimer, a long-time participant in the IPCC and coordinating lead author of the Fifth Assessment Report conceded in <hl> Science Magazine <hl>'s State of the Planet 2008-2009 some limitations of the IPCC consensus approach and asks for concurring, smaller assessments of special problems instead of the large scale approach as in the previous IPCC assessment reports. It has become more important to provide a broader exploration of uncertainties. Others see as well mixed blessings of the drive for consensus within the IPCC process and ask to include dissenting or minority positions or to improve statements about uncertainties.

Michael Oppenheimer, a long-time participant in the IPCC and coordinating lead author of the Fifth Assessment Report conceded in <hl> Science Magazine <hl> 's State of the Planet 2008-2009 some limitations of the IPCC consensus approach and asks for concurring, smaller assessments of special problems instead of the large scale approach as in the previous IPCC assessment reports.


Question: What approach did Oppenheimer advocate?

Answer: concurring, smaller assessments of special problems

<hl> Michael Oppenheimer, a long-time participant in the IPCC and coordinating lead author of the Fifth Assessment Report conceded in Science Magazine's State of the Planet 2008-2009 some limitations of the IPCC consensus approach and asks for concurring, smaller assessments of special problems instead of the large scale approach as in the previous IPCC assessment reports. <hl> It has become more important to provide a broader exploration of uncertainties. Others see as well mixed blessings of the drive for consensus within the IPCC process and ask to include dissenting or minority positions or to improve statements about uncertainties.

Michael Oppenheimer, a long-time participant in the IPCC and coordinating lead author of the Fifth Assessment Report conceded in Science Magazine's State of the Planet 2008-2009 some limitations of the IPCC consensus approach and asks for <hl> concurring, smaller assessments of special problems <hl> instead of the large scale approach as in the previous IPCC assessment reports. It has become more important to provide a broader exploration of uncertainties. Others see as well mixed blessings of the drive for consensus within the IPCC process and ask to include dissenting or minority positions or to improve statements about uncertainties.


Question: What has successfully dealt with ozone depletion?

The IPCC process on climate change and its efficiency and success has been compared with dealings with other environmental challenges (compare Ozone depletion and global warming). In case of the Ozone depletion global regulation based on the Montreal Protocol has been successful, in case of Climate Change, the Kyoto Protocol failed. The Ozone case was used to assess the efficiency of the IPCC process. The lockstep situation of the IPCC is having built a broad science consensus while states and governments still follow different, if not opposing goals. The underlying linear model of policy-making of more knowledge we have, the better the political response will be is being doubted.

Answer: the Montreal Protocol

The IPCC process on climate change and its efficiency and success has been compared with dealings with other environmental challenges (compare Ozone depletion and global warming). <hl> In case of the Ozone depletion global regulation based on the Montreal Protocol has been successful, in case of Climate Change, the Kyoto Protocol failed. <hl> The Ozone case was used to assess the efficiency of the IPCC process. The lockstep situation of the IPCC is having built a broad science consensus while states and governments still follow different, if not opposing goals. The underlying linear model of policy-making of more knowledge we have, the better the political response will be is being doubted.

The IPCC process on climate change and its efficiency and success has been compared with dealings with other environmental challenges (compare Ozone depletion and global warming). In case of the Ozone depletion global regulation based on <hl> the Montreal Protocol <hl> has been successful, in case of Climate Change, the Kyoto Protocol failed. The Ozone case was used to assess the efficiency of the IPCC process. The lockstep situation of the IPCC is having built a broad science consensus while states and governments still follow different, if not opposing goals. The underlying linear model of policy-making of more knowledge we have, the better the political response will be is being doubted.


Question: What did the Kyoto Protocol try to address?

Answer: Climate Change

The IPCC process on climate change and its efficiency and success has been compared with dealings with other environmental challenges (compare Ozone depletion and global warming). <hl> In case of the Ozone depletion global regulation based on the Montreal Protocol has been successful, in case of Climate Change , the Kyoto Protocol failed. <hl> The Ozone case was used to assess the efficiency of the IPCC process. The lockstep situation of the IPCC is having built a broad science consensus while states and governments still follow different, if not opposing goals. The underlying linear model of policy-making of more knowledge we have, the better the political response will be is being doubted.

The IPCC process on climate change and its efficiency and success has been compared with dealings with other environmental challenges (compare Ozone depletion and global warming). In case of the Ozone depletion global regulation based on the Montreal Protocol has been successful, in case of <hl> Climate Change <hl>, the Kyoto Protocol failed. The Ozone case was used to assess the efficiency of the IPCC process. The lockstep situation of the IPCC is having built a broad science consensus while states and governments still follow different, if not opposing goals. The underlying linear model of policy-making of more knowledge we have, the better the political response will be is being doubted.

In case of the Ozone depletion global regulation based on the Montreal Protocol has been successful, in case of <hl> Climate Change <hl> , the Kyoto Protocol failed.


Question: Whose goals often still oppose the IPCC?

Answer: states and governments

The IPCC process on climate change and its efficiency and success has been compared with dealings with other environmental challenges (compare Ozone depletion and global warming). In case of the Ozone depletion global regulation based on the Montreal Protocol has been successful, in case of Climate Change, the Kyoto Protocol failed. The Ozone case was used to assess the efficiency of the IPCC process. <hl> The lockstep situation of the IPCC is having built a broad science consensus while states and governments still follow different, if not opposing goals. <hl> The underlying linear model of policy-making of more knowledge we have, the better the political response will be is being doubted.

The IPCC process on climate change and its efficiency and success has been compared with dealings with other environmental challenges (compare Ozone depletion and global warming). In case of the Ozone depletion global regulation based on the Montreal Protocol has been successful, in case of Climate Change, the Kyoto Protocol failed. The Ozone case was used to assess the efficiency of the IPCC process. The lockstep situation of the IPCC is having built a broad science consensus while <hl> states and governments <hl> still follow different, if not opposing goals. The underlying linear model of policy-making of more knowledge we have, the better the political response will be is being doubted.


Question: Who said people involved in the ozone situation had "a better understanding of scientific ignorance and uncertainties"?

According to Sheldon Ungar's comparison with global warming, the actors in the ozone depletion case had a better understanding of scientific ignorance and uncertainties. The ozone case communicated to lay persons "with easy-to-understand bridging metaphors derived from the popular culture" and related to "immediate risks with everyday relevance", while the public opinion on climate change sees no imminent danger. The stepwise mitigation of the ozone layer challenge was based as well on successfully reducing regional burden sharing conflicts. In case of the IPCC conclusions and the failure of the Kyoto Protocol, varying regional cost-benefit analysis and burden-sharing conflicts with regard to the distribution of emission reductions remain an unsolved problem. In the UK, a report for a House of Lords committee asked to urge the IPCC to involve better assessments of costs and benefits of climate change but the Stern Review ordered by the UK government made a stronger argument in favor to combat human-made climate change.

Answer: Sheldon Ungar

According to Sheldon Ungar 's

<hl> According to Sheldon Ungar 's <hl> comparison with global warming, the actors in the ozone depletion case had a better understanding of scientific ignorance and uncertainties. The ozone case communicated to lay persons "with easy-to-understand bridging metaphors derived from the popular culture" and related to "immediate risks with everyday relevance", while the public opinion on climate change sees no imminent danger. The stepwise mitigation of the ozone layer challenge was based as well on successfully reducing regional burden sharing conflicts. In case of the IPCC conclusions and the failure of the Kyoto Protocol, varying regional cost-benefit analysis and burden-sharing conflicts with regard to the distribution of emission reductions remain an unsolved problem. In the UK, a report for a House of Lords committee asked to urge the IPCC to involve better assessments of costs and benefits of climate change but the Stern Review ordered by the UK government made a stronger argument in favor to combat human-made climate change.

According to <hl> Sheldon Ungar <hl>'s comparison with global warming, the actors in the ozone depletion case had a better understanding of scientific ignorance and uncertainties. The ozone case communicated to lay persons "with easy-to-understand bridging metaphors derived from the popular culture" and related to "immediate risks with everyday relevance", while the public opinion on climate change sees no imminent danger. The stepwise mitigation of the ozone layer challenge was based as well on successfully reducing regional burden sharing conflicts. In case of the IPCC conclusions and the failure of the Kyoto Protocol, varying regional cost-benefit analysis and burden-sharing conflicts with regard to the distribution of emission reductions remain an unsolved problem. In the UK, a report for a House of Lords committee asked to urge the IPCC to involve better assessments of costs and benefits of climate change but the Stern Review ordered by the UK government made a stronger argument in favor to combat human-made climate change.


Question: What remain unsolved problems with the Kyoto Protocol?

Answer: varying regional cost-benefit analysis and burden-sharing conflicts with regard to the distribution of emission reductions

According to Sheldon Ungar's comparison with global warming, the actors in the ozone depletion case had a better understanding of scientific ignorance and uncertainties. The ozone case communicated to lay persons "with easy-to-understand bridging metaphors derived from the popular culture" and related to "immediate risks with everyday relevance", while the public opinion on climate change sees no imminent danger. The stepwise mitigation of the ozone layer challenge was based as well on successfully reducing regional burden sharing conflicts. <hl> In case of the IPCC conclusions and the failure of the Kyoto Protocol, varying regional cost-benefit analysis and burden-sharing conflicts with regard to the distribution of emission reductions remain an unsolved problem. <hl> In the UK, a report for a House of Lords committee asked to urge the IPCC to involve better assessments of costs and benefits of climate change but the Stern Review ordered by the UK government made a stronger argument in favor to combat human-made climate change.

According to Sheldon Ungar's comparison with global warming, the actors in the ozone depletion case had a better understanding of scientific ignorance and uncertainties. The ozone case communicated to lay persons "with easy-to-understand bridging metaphors derived from the popular culture" and related to "immediate risks with everyday relevance", while the public opinion on climate change sees no imminent danger. The stepwise mitigation of the ozone layer challenge was based as well on successfully reducing regional burden sharing conflicts. In case of the IPCC conclusions and the failure of the Kyoto Protocol, <hl> varying regional cost-benefit analysis and burden-sharing conflicts with regard to the distribution of emission reductions <hl> remain an unsolved problem. In the UK, a report for a House of Lords committee asked to urge the IPCC to involve better assessments of costs and benefits of climate change but the Stern Review ordered by the UK government made a stronger argument in favor to combat human-made climate change.


Question: What conflicts did the ozone mitigation reduce?

Answer: regional burden sharing conflicts

According to Sheldon Ungar's comparison with global warming, the actors in the ozone depletion case had a better understanding of scientific ignorance and uncertainties. The ozone case communicated to lay persons "with easy-to-understand bridging metaphors derived from the popular culture" and related to "immediate risks with everyday relevance", while the public opinion on climate change sees no imminent danger. <hl> The stepwise mitigation of the ozone layer challenge was based as well on successfully reducing regional burden sharing conflicts . <hl> In case of the IPCC conclusions and the failure of the Kyoto Protocol, varying regional cost-benefit analysis and burden-sharing conflicts with regard to the distribution of emission reductions remain an unsolved problem. In the UK, a report for a House of Lords committee asked to urge the IPCC to involve better assessments of costs and benefits of climate change but the Stern Review ordered by the UK government made a stronger argument in favor to combat human-made climate change.

According to Sheldon Ungar's comparison with global warming, the actors in the ozone depletion case had a better understanding of scientific ignorance and uncertainties. The ozone case communicated to lay persons "with easy-to-understand bridging metaphors derived from the popular culture" and related to "immediate risks with everyday relevance", while the public opinion on climate change sees no imminent danger. The stepwise mitigation of the ozone layer challenge was based as well on successfully reducing <hl> regional burden sharing conflicts <hl>. In case of the IPCC conclusions and the failure of the Kyoto Protocol, varying regional cost-benefit analysis and burden-sharing conflicts with regard to the distribution of emission reductions remain an unsolved problem. In the UK, a report for a House of Lords committee asked to urge the IPCC to involve better assessments of costs and benefits of climate change but the Stern Review ordered by the UK government made a stronger argument in favor to combat human-made climate change.

The stepwise mitigation of the ozone layer challenge was based as well on successfully reducing <hl> regional burden sharing conflicts <hl> .


Question: Who ordered the Stern Review?

Answer: the UK government

According to Sheldon Ungar's comparison with global warming, the actors in the ozone depletion case had a better understanding of scientific ignorance and uncertainties. The ozone case communicated to lay persons "with easy-to-understand bridging metaphors derived from the popular culture" and related to "immediate risks with everyday relevance", while the public opinion on climate change sees no imminent danger. The stepwise mitigation of the ozone layer challenge was based as well on successfully reducing regional burden sharing conflicts. In case of the IPCC conclusions and the failure of the Kyoto Protocol, varying regional cost-benefit analysis and burden-sharing conflicts with regard to the distribution of emission reductions remain an unsolved problem. <hl> In the UK, a report for a House of Lords committee asked to urge the IPCC to involve better assessments of costs and benefits of climate change but the Stern Review ordered by the UK government made a stronger argument in favor to combat human-made climate change. <hl>

According to Sheldon Ungar's comparison with global warming, the actors in the ozone depletion case had a better understanding of scientific ignorance and uncertainties. The ozone case communicated to lay persons "with easy-to-understand bridging metaphors derived from the popular culture" and related to "immediate risks with everyday relevance", while the public opinion on climate change sees no imminent danger. The stepwise mitigation of the ozone layer challenge was based as well on successfully reducing regional burden sharing conflicts. In case of the IPCC conclusions and the failure of the Kyoto Protocol, varying regional cost-benefit analysis and burden-sharing conflicts with regard to the distribution of emission reductions remain an unsolved problem. In the UK, a report for a House of Lords committee asked to urge the IPCC to involve better assessments of costs and benefits of climate change but the Stern Review ordered by <hl> the UK government <hl> made a stronger argument in favor to combat human-made climate change.


Question: What does the IPCC rely on for research?

Since the IPCC does not carry out its own research, it operates on the basis of scientific papers and independently documented results from other scientific bodies, and its schedule for producing reports requires a deadline for submissions prior to the report's final release. In principle, this means that any significant new evidence or events that change our understanding of climate science between this deadline and publication of an IPCC report cannot be included. In an area of science where our scientific understanding is rapidly changing, this has been raised as a serious shortcoming in a body which is widely regarded as the ultimate authority on the science. However, there has generally been a steady evolution of key findings and levels of scientific confidence from one assessment report to the next.[citation needed]

Answer: other scientific bodies

<hl> Since the IPCC does not carry out its own research, it operates on the basis of scientific papers and independently documented results from other scientific bodies , and its schedule for producing reports requires a deadline for submissions prior to the report's final release. <hl> In principle, this means that any significant new evidence or events that change our understanding of climate science between this deadline and publication of an IPCC report cannot be included. In an area of science where our scientific understanding is rapidly changing, this has been raised as a serious shortcoming in a body which is widely regarded as the ultimate authority on the science. However, there has generally been a steady evolution of key findings and levels of scientific confidence from one assessment report to the next.[citation needed]

Since the IPCC does not carry out its own research, it operates on the basis of scientific papers and independently documented results from <hl> other scientific bodies <hl>, and its schedule for producing reports requires a deadline for submissions prior to the report's final release. In principle, this means that any significant new evidence or events that change our understanding of climate science between this deadline and publication of an IPCC report cannot be included. In an area of science where our scientific understanding is rapidly changing, this has been raised as a serious shortcoming in a body which is widely regarded as the ultimate authority on the science. However, there has generally been a steady evolution of key findings and levels of scientific confidence from one assessment report to the next.[citation needed]

Since the IPCC does not carry out its own research, it operates on the basis of scientific papers and independently documented results from <hl> other scientific bodies <hl> , and its schedule for producing reports requires a deadline for submissions prior to the report's final release.


Question: What can the IPCC's report deadlines cause to be omitted?

Answer: significant new evidence or events that change our understanding of climate science

Since the IPCC does not carry out its own research, it operates on the basis of scientific papers and independently documented results from other scientific bodies, and its schedule for producing reports requires a deadline for submissions prior to the report's final release. <hl> In principle, this means that any significant new evidence or events that change our understanding of climate science between this deadline and publication of an IPCC report cannot be included. <hl> In an area of science where our scientific understanding is rapidly changing, this has been raised as a serious shortcoming in a body which is widely regarded as the ultimate authority on the science. However, there has generally been a steady evolution of key findings and levels of scientific confidence from one assessment report to the next.[citation needed]

Since the IPCC does not carry out its own research, it operates on the basis of scientific papers and independently documented results from other scientific bodies, and its schedule for producing reports requires a deadline for submissions prior to the report's final release. In principle, this means that any <hl> significant new evidence or events that change our understanding of climate science <hl> between this deadline and publication of an IPCC report cannot be included. In an area of science where our scientific understanding is rapidly changing, this has been raised as a serious shortcoming in a body which is widely regarded as the ultimate authority on the science. However, there has generally been a steady evolution of key findings and levels of scientific confidence from one assessment report to the next.[citation needed]


Question: Who is seen as the ultimate climate change authority?

Answer: IPCC

<hl> Since the IPCC does not carry out its own research, it operates on the basis of scientific papers and independently documented results from other scientific bodies, and its schedule for producing reports requires a deadline for submissions prior to the report's final release. <hl> In principle, this means that any significant new evidence or events that change our understanding of climate science between this deadline and publication of an IPCC report cannot be included. In an area of science where our scientific understanding is rapidly changing, this has been raised as a serious shortcoming in a body which is widely regarded as the ultimate authority on the science. However, there has generally been a steady evolution of key findings and levels of scientific confidence from one assessment report to the next.[citation needed]

Since the <hl> IPCC <hl> does not carry out its own research, it operates on the basis of scientific papers and independently documented results from other scientific bodies, and its schedule for producing reports requires a deadline for submissions prior to the report's final release. In principle, this means that any significant new evidence or events that change our understanding of climate science between this deadline and publication of an IPCC report cannot be included. In an area of science where our scientific understanding is rapidly changing, this has been raised as a serious shortcoming in a body which is widely regarded as the ultimate authority on the science. However, there has generally been a steady evolution of key findings and levels of scientific confidence from one assessment report to the next.[citation needed]


Question: How many scientists called to change the IPCC in Feb 2010?

In February 2010, in response to controversies regarding claims in the Fourth Assessment Report, five climate scientists – all contributing or lead IPCC report authors – wrote in the journal Nature calling for changes to the IPCC. They suggested a range of new organizational options, from tightening the selection of lead authors and contributors, to dumping it in favor of a small permanent body, or even turning the whole climate science assessment process into a moderated "living" Wikipedia-IPCC. Other recommendations included that the panel employ a full-time staff and remove government oversight from its processes to avoid political interference.

Answer: five

<hl> In February 2010, in response to controversies regarding claims in the Fourth Assessment Report, five climate scientists – all contributing or lead IPCC report authors – wrote in the journal Nature calling for changes to the IPCC. <hl> They suggested a range of new organizational options, from tightening the selection of lead authors and contributors, to dumping it in favor of a small permanent body, or even turning the whole climate science assessment process into a moderated "living" Wikipedia-IPCC. Other recommendations included that the panel employ a full-time staff and remove government oversight from its processes to avoid political interference.

In February 2010, in response to controversies regarding claims in the Fourth Assessment Report, <hl> five <hl> climate scientists – all contributing or lead IPCC report authors – wrote in the journal Nature calling for changes to the IPCC. They suggested a range of new organizational options, from tightening the selection of lead authors and contributors, to dumping it in favor of a small permanent body, or even turning the whole climate science assessment process into a moderated "living" Wikipedia-IPCC. Other recommendations included that the panel employ a full-time staff and remove government oversight from its processes to avoid political interference.


Question: Where was the Feb 2010 call for change published?

Answer: the journal Nature

<hl> In February 2010, in response to controversies regarding claims in the Fourth Assessment Report, five climate scientists – all contributing or lead IPCC report authors – wrote in the journal Nature calling for changes to the IPCC. <hl> They suggested a range of new organizational options, from tightening the selection of lead authors and contributors, to dumping it in favor of a small permanent body, or even turning the whole climate science assessment process into a moderated "living" Wikipedia-IPCC. Other recommendations included that the panel employ a full-time staff and remove government oversight from its processes to avoid political interference.

In February 2010, in response to controversies regarding claims in the Fourth Assessment Report, five climate scientists – all contributing or lead IPCC report authors – wrote in <hl> the journal Nature <hl> calling for changes to the IPCC. They suggested a range of new organizational options, from tightening the selection of lead authors and contributors, to dumping it in favor of a small permanent body, or even turning the whole climate science assessment process into a moderated "living" Wikipedia-IPCC. Other recommendations included that the panel employ a full-time staff and remove government oversight from its processes to avoid political interference.


Question: What was one proposal to let the IPCC respond to new evidence faster?

Answer: turning the whole climate science assessment process into a moderated "living" Wikipedia-IPCC

In February 2010, in response to controversies regarding claims in the Fourth Assessment Report, five climate scientists – all contributing or lead IPCC report authors – wrote in the journal Nature calling for changes to the IPCC. <hl> They suggested a range of new organizational options, from tightening the selection of lead authors and contributors, to dumping it in favor of a small permanent body, or even turning the whole climate science assessment process into a moderated "living" Wikipedia-IPCC . <hl> Other recommendations included that the panel employ a full-time staff and remove government oversight from its processes to avoid political interference.

In February 2010, in response to controversies regarding claims in the Fourth Assessment Report, five climate scientists – all contributing or lead IPCC report authors – wrote in the journal Nature calling for changes to the IPCC. They suggested a range of new organizational options, from tightening the selection of lead authors and contributors, to dumping it in favor of a small permanent body, or even <hl> turning the whole climate science assessment process into a moderated "living" Wikipedia-IPCC <hl>. Other recommendations included that the panel employ a full-time staff and remove government oversight from its processes to avoid political interference.

They suggested a range of new organizational options, from tightening the selection of lead authors and contributors, to dumping it in favor of a small permanent body, or even <hl> turning the whole climate science assessment process into a moderated "living" Wikipedia-IPCC <hl> .


Question: How was it suggested that the IPCC avoid political problems?

Answer: remove government oversight from its processes

In February 2010, in response to controversies regarding claims in the Fourth Assessment Report, five climate scientists – all contributing or lead IPCC report authors – wrote in the journal Nature calling for changes to the IPCC. They suggested a range of new organizational options, from tightening the selection of lead authors and contributors, to dumping it in favor of a small permanent body, or even turning the whole climate science assessment process into a moderated "living" Wikipedia-IPCC. <hl> Other recommendations included that the panel employ a full-time staff and remove government oversight from its processes to avoid political interference. <hl>

In February 2010, in response to controversies regarding claims in the Fourth Assessment Report, five climate scientists – all contributing or lead IPCC report authors – wrote in the journal Nature calling for changes to the IPCC. They suggested a range of new organizational options, from tightening the selection of lead authors and contributors, to dumping it in favor of a small permanent body, or even turning the whole climate science assessment process into a moderated "living" Wikipedia-IPCC. Other recommendations included that the panel employ a full-time staff and <hl> remove government oversight from its processes <hl> to avoid political interference.


Question: What is the primary purpose of chloroplasts?

Chloroplasts' main role is to conduct photosynthesis, where the photosynthetic pigment chlorophyll captures the energy from sunlight and converts it and stores it in the energy-storage molecules ATP and NADPH while freeing oxygen from water. They then use the ATP and NADPH to make organic molecules from carbon dioxide in a process known as the Calvin cycle. Chloroplasts carry out a number of other functions, including fatty acid synthesis, much amino acid synthesis, and the immune response in plants. The number of chloroplasts per cell varies from 1 in algae up to 100 in plants like Arabidopsis and wheat.

Answer: to conduct photosynthesis

<hl> Chloroplasts' main role is to conduct photosynthesis , where the photosynthetic pigment chlorophyll captures the energy from sunlight and converts it and stores it in the energy-storage molecules ATP and NADPH while freeing oxygen from water. <hl> They then use the ATP and NADPH to make organic molecules from carbon dioxide in a process known as the Calvin cycle. Chloroplasts carry out a number of other functions, including fatty acid synthesis, much amino acid synthesis, and the immune response in plants. The number of chloroplasts per cell varies from 1 in algae up to 100 in plants like Arabidopsis and wheat.

Chloroplasts' main role is <hl> to conduct photosynthesis <hl>, where the photosynthetic pigment chlorophyll captures the energy from sunlight and converts it and stores it in the energy-storage molecules ATP and NADPH while freeing oxygen from water. They then use the ATP and NADPH to make organic molecules from carbon dioxide in a process known as the Calvin cycle. Chloroplasts carry out a number of other functions, including fatty acid synthesis, much amino acid synthesis, and the immune response in plants. The number of chloroplasts per cell varies from 1 in algae up to 100 in plants like Arabidopsis and wheat.

Chloroplasts' main role is <hl> to conduct photosynthesis <hl> , where the photosynthetic pigment chlorophyll captures the energy from sunlight and converts it and stores it in the energy-storage molecules ATP and NADPH while freeing oxygen from water.


Question: What does ATP store?

Answer: energy

<hl> Chloroplasts' main role is to conduct photosynthesis, where the photosynthetic pigment chlorophyll captures the energy from sunlight and converts it and stores it in the energy-storage molecules ATP and NADPH while freeing oxygen from water. <hl> They then use the ATP and NADPH to make organic molecules from carbon dioxide in a process known as the Calvin cycle. Chloroplasts carry out a number of other functions, including fatty acid synthesis, much amino acid synthesis, and the immune response in plants. The number of chloroplasts per cell varies from 1 in algae up to 100 in plants like Arabidopsis and wheat.

Chloroplasts' main role is to conduct photosynthesis, where the photosynthetic pigment chlorophyll captures the <hl> energy <hl> from sunlight and converts it and stores it in the energy-storage molecules ATP and NADPH while freeing oxygen from water. They then use the ATP and NADPH to make organic molecules from carbon dioxide in a process known as the Calvin cycle. Chloroplasts carry out a number of other functions, including fatty acid synthesis, much amino acid synthesis, and the immune response in plants. The number of chloroplasts per cell varies from 1 in algae up to 100 in plants like Arabidopsis and wheat.


Question: What does NADPH store?

Answer: energy

<hl> Chloroplasts' main role is to conduct photosynthesis, where the photosynthetic pigment chlorophyll captures the energy from sunlight and converts it and stores it in the energy-storage molecules ATP and NADPH while freeing oxygen from water. <hl> They then use the ATP and NADPH to make organic molecules from carbon dioxide in a process known as the Calvin cycle. Chloroplasts carry out a number of other functions, including fatty acid synthesis, much amino acid synthesis, and the immune response in plants. The number of chloroplasts per cell varies from 1 in algae up to 100 in plants like Arabidopsis and wheat.

Chloroplasts' main role is to conduct photosynthesis, where the photosynthetic pigment chlorophyll captures the <hl> energy <hl> from sunlight and converts it and stores it in the energy-storage molecules ATP and NADPH while freeing oxygen from water. They then use the ATP and NADPH to make organic molecules from carbon dioxide in a process known as the Calvin cycle. Chloroplasts carry out a number of other functions, including fatty acid synthesis, much amino acid synthesis, and the immune response in plants. The number of chloroplasts per cell varies from 1 in algae up to 100 in plants like Arabidopsis and wheat.


Question: What is the process of turning CO2 into organic molecules called?

Answer: the Calvin cycle

Chloroplasts' main role is to conduct photosynthesis, where the photosynthetic pigment chlorophyll captures the energy from sunlight and converts it and stores it in the energy-storage molecules ATP and NADPH while freeing oxygen from water. <hl> They then use the ATP and NADPH to make organic molecules from carbon dioxide in a process known as the Calvin cycle . <hl> Chloroplasts carry out a number of other functions, including fatty acid synthesis, much amino acid synthesis, and the immune response in plants. The number of chloroplasts per cell varies from 1 in algae up to 100 in plants like Arabidopsis and wheat.

Chloroplasts' main role is to conduct photosynthesis, where the photosynthetic pigment chlorophyll captures the energy from sunlight and converts it and stores it in the energy-storage molecules ATP and NADPH while freeing oxygen from water. They then use the ATP and NADPH to make organic molecules from carbon dioxide in a process known as <hl> the Calvin cycle <hl>. Chloroplasts carry out a number of other functions, including fatty acid synthesis, much amino acid synthesis, and the immune response in plants. The number of chloroplasts per cell varies from 1 in algae up to 100 in plants like Arabidopsis and wheat.

They then use the ATP and NADPH to make organic molecules from carbon dioxide in a process known as <hl> the Calvin cycle <hl> .


Question: How many chloroplasts per cell does algae have?

Answer: 1

Chloroplasts' main role is to conduct photosynthesis, where the photosynthetic pigment chlorophyll captures the energy from sunlight and converts it and stores it in the energy-storage molecules ATP and NADPH while freeing oxygen from water. They then use the ATP and NADPH to make organic molecules from carbon dioxide in a process known as the Calvin cycle. Chloroplasts carry out a number of other functions, including fatty acid synthesis, much amino acid synthesis, and the immune response in plants. <hl> The number of chloroplasts per cell varies from 1 in algae up to 100 in plants like Arabidopsis and wheat. <hl>

Chloroplasts' main role is to conduct photosynthesis, where the photosynthetic pigment chlorophyll captures the energy from sunlight and converts it and stores it in the energy-storage molecules ATP and NADPH while freeing oxygen from water. They then use the ATP and NADPH to make organic molecules from carbon dioxide in a process known as the Calvin cycle. Chloroplasts carry out a number of other functions, including fatty acid synthesis, much amino acid synthesis, and the immune response in plants. The number of chloroplasts per cell varies from <hl> 1 <hl> in algae up to 100 in plants like Arabidopsis and wheat.


Question: How do chloroplasts reproduce?

Chloroplasts are highly dynamic—they circulate and are moved around within plant cells, and occasionally pinch in two to reproduce. Their behavior is strongly influenced by environmental factors like light color and intensity. Chloroplasts, like mitochondria, contain their own DNA, which is thought to be inherited from their ancestor—a photosynthetic cyanobacterium that was engulfed by an early eukaryotic cell. Chloroplasts cannot be made by the plant cell and must be inherited by each daughter cell during cell division.

Answer: pinch in two

<hl> Chloroplasts are highly dynamic—they circulate and are moved around within plant cells, and occasionally pinch in two to reproduce. <hl> Their behavior is strongly influenced by environmental factors like light color and intensity. Chloroplasts, like mitochondria, contain their own DNA, which is thought to be inherited from their ancestor—a photosynthetic cyanobacterium that was engulfed by an early eukaryotic cell. Chloroplasts cannot be made by the plant cell and must be inherited by each daughter cell during cell division.

Chloroplasts are highly dynamic—they circulate and are moved around within plant cells, and occasionally <hl> pinch in two <hl> to reproduce. Their behavior is strongly influenced by environmental factors like light color and intensity. Chloroplasts, like mitochondria, contain their own DNA, which is thought to be inherited from their ancestor—a photosynthetic cyanobacterium that was engulfed by an early eukaryotic cell. Chloroplasts cannot be made by the plant cell and must be inherited by each daughter cell during cell division.


Question: What influences chloroplasts' behavior?

Answer: environmental factors like light color and intensity

Chloroplasts are highly dynamic—they circulate and are moved around within plant cells, and occasionally pinch in two to reproduce. <hl> Their behavior is strongly influenced by environmental factors like light color and intensity . <hl> Chloroplasts, like mitochondria, contain their own DNA, which is thought to be inherited from their ancestor—a photosynthetic cyanobacterium that was engulfed by an early eukaryotic cell. Chloroplasts cannot be made by the plant cell and must be inherited by each daughter cell during cell division.

Chloroplasts are highly dynamic—they circulate and are moved around within plant cells, and occasionally pinch in two to reproduce. Their behavior is strongly influenced by <hl> environmental factors like light color and intensity <hl>. Chloroplasts, like mitochondria, contain their own DNA, which is thought to be inherited from their ancestor—a photosynthetic cyanobacterium that was engulfed by an early eukaryotic cell. Chloroplasts cannot be made by the plant cell and must be inherited by each daughter cell during cell division.

Their behavior is strongly influenced by <hl> environmental factors like light color and intensity <hl> .


Question: How are chloroplasts similar to mitochondria?

Answer: contain their own DNA

Chloroplasts are highly dynamic—they circulate and are moved around within plant cells, and occasionally pinch in two to reproduce. Their behavior is strongly influenced by environmental factors like light color and intensity. <hl> Chloroplasts, like mitochondria, contain their own DNA , which is thought to be inherited from their ancestor—a photosynthetic cyanobacterium that was engulfed by an early eukaryotic cell. <hl> Chloroplasts cannot be made by the plant cell and must be inherited by each daughter cell during cell division.

Chloroplasts are highly dynamic—they circulate and are moved around within plant cells, and occasionally pinch in two to reproduce. Their behavior is strongly influenced by environmental factors like light color and intensity. Chloroplasts, like mitochondria, <hl> contain their own DNA <hl>, which is thought to be inherited from their ancestor—a photosynthetic cyanobacterium that was engulfed by an early eukaryotic cell. Chloroplasts cannot be made by the plant cell and must be inherited by each daughter cell during cell division.

Chloroplasts, like mitochondria, <hl> contain their own DNA <hl> , which is thought to be inherited from their ancestor—a photosynthetic cyanobacterium that was engulfed by an early eukaryotic cell.


Question: What was the ancestor of chloroplasts?

Answer: a photosynthetic cyanobacterium that was engulfed by an early eukaryotic cell

Chloroplasts are highly dynamic—they circulate and are moved around within plant cells, and occasionally pinch in two to reproduce. Their behavior is strongly influenced by environmental factors like light color and intensity. <hl> Chloroplasts, like mitochondria, contain their own DNA, which is thought to be inherited from their ancestor— a photosynthetic cyanobacterium that was engulfed by an early eukaryotic cell . <hl> Chloroplasts cannot be made by the plant cell and must be inherited by each daughter cell during cell division.

Chloroplasts are highly dynamic—they circulate and are moved around within plant cells, and occasionally pinch in two to reproduce. Their behavior is strongly influenced by environmental factors like light color and intensity. Chloroplasts, like mitochondria, contain their own DNA, which is thought to be inherited from their ancestor—<hl> a photosynthetic cyanobacterium that was engulfed by an early eukaryotic cell <hl>. Chloroplasts cannot be made by the plant cell and must be inherited by each daughter cell during cell division.

Chloroplasts, like mitochondria, contain their own DNA, which is thought to be inherited from their ancestor— <hl> a photosynthetic cyanobacterium that was engulfed by an early eukaryotic cell <hl> .


Question: How do plants get chloroplasts?

Answer: must be inherited by each daughter cell during cell division

Chloroplasts are highly dynamic—they circulate and are moved around within plant cells, and occasionally pinch in two to reproduce. Their behavior is strongly influenced by environmental factors like light color and intensity. Chloroplasts, like mitochondria, contain their own DNA, which is thought to be inherited from their ancestor—a photosynthetic cyanobacterium that was engulfed by an early eukaryotic cell. <hl> Chloroplasts cannot be made by the plant cell and must be inherited by each daughter cell during cell division . <hl>

Chloroplasts are highly dynamic—they circulate and are moved around within plant cells, and occasionally pinch in two to reproduce. Their behavior is strongly influenced by environmental factors like light color and intensity. Chloroplasts, like mitochondria, contain their own DNA, which is thought to be inherited from their ancestor—a photosynthetic cyanobacterium that was engulfed by an early eukaryotic cell. Chloroplasts cannot be made by the plant cell and <hl> must be inherited by each daughter cell during cell division <hl>.

Chloroplasts cannot be made by the plant cell and <hl> must be inherited by each daughter cell during cell division <hl> .


Question: Which organisms have chloroplasts?

Chloroplasts are one of many types of organelles in the plant cell. They are considered to have originated from cyanobacteria through endosymbiosis—when a eukaryotic cell engulfed a photosynthesizing cyanobacterium that became a permanent resident in the cell. Mitochondria are thought to have come from a similar event, where an aerobic prokaryote was engulfed. This origin of chloroplasts was first suggested by the Russian biologist Konstantin Mereschkowski in 1905 after Andreas Schimper observed in 1883 that chloroplasts closely resemble cyanobacteria. Chloroplasts are only found in plants and algae.

Answer: plants and algae

Chloroplasts are one of many types of organelles in the plant cell. They are considered to have originated from cyanobacteria through endosymbiosis—when a eukaryotic cell engulfed a photosynthesizing cyanobacterium that became a permanent resident in the cell. Mitochondria are thought to have come from a similar event, where an aerobic prokaryote was engulfed. This origin of chloroplasts was first suggested by the Russian biologist Konstantin Mereschkowski in 1905 after Andreas Schimper observed in 1883 that chloroplasts closely resemble cyanobacteria. <hl> Chloroplasts are only found in plants and algae . <hl>

Chloroplasts are one of many types of organelles in the plant cell. They are considered to have originated from cyanobacteria through endosymbiosis—when a eukaryotic cell engulfed a photosynthesizing cyanobacterium that became a permanent resident in the cell. Mitochondria are thought to have come from a similar event, where an aerobic prokaryote was engulfed. This origin of chloroplasts was first suggested by the Russian biologist Konstantin Mereschkowski in 1905 after Andreas Schimper observed in 1883 that chloroplasts closely resemble cyanobacteria. Chloroplasts are only found in <hl> plants and algae <hl>.

Chloroplasts are only found in <hl> plants and algae <hl> .


Question: What nationality was Konstantin Mereschkowski?

Answer: Russian

Chloroplasts are one of many types of organelles in the plant cell. They are considered to have originated from cyanobacteria through endosymbiosis—when a eukaryotic cell engulfed a photosynthesizing cyanobacterium that became a permanent resident in the cell. Mitochondria are thought to have come from a similar event, where an aerobic prokaryote was engulfed. <hl> This origin of chloroplasts was first suggested by the Russian biologist Konstantin Mereschkowski in 1905 after Andreas Schimper observed in 1883 that chloroplasts closely resemble cyanobacteria. <hl> Chloroplasts are only found in plants and algae.

Chloroplasts are one of many types of organelles in the plant cell. They are considered to have originated from cyanobacteria through endosymbiosis—when a eukaryotic cell engulfed a photosynthesizing cyanobacterium that became a permanent resident in the cell. Mitochondria are thought to have come from a similar event, where an aerobic prokaryote was engulfed. This origin of chloroplasts was first suggested by the <hl> Russian <hl> biologist Konstantin Mereschkowski in 1905 after Andreas Schimper observed in 1883 that chloroplasts closely resemble cyanobacteria. Chloroplasts are only found in plants and algae.


Question: What was Konstantin Mereschkowski's career?

Answer: biologist

Chloroplasts are one of many types of organelles in the plant cell. They are considered to have originated from cyanobacteria through endosymbiosis—when a eukaryotic cell engulfed a photosynthesizing cyanobacterium that became a permanent resident in the cell. Mitochondria are thought to have come from a similar event, where an aerobic prokaryote was engulfed. <hl> This origin of chloroplasts was first suggested by the Russian biologist Konstantin Mereschkowski in 1905 after Andreas Schimper observed in 1883 that chloroplasts closely resemble cyanobacteria. <hl> Chloroplasts are only found in plants and algae.

Chloroplasts are one of many types of organelles in the plant cell. They are considered to have originated from cyanobacteria through endosymbiosis—when a eukaryotic cell engulfed a photosynthesizing cyanobacterium that became a permanent resident in the cell. Mitochondria are thought to have come from a similar event, where an aerobic prokaryote was engulfed. This origin of chloroplasts was first suggested by the Russian <hl> biologist <hl> Konstantin Mereschkowski in 1905 after Andreas Schimper observed in 1883 that chloroplasts closely resemble cyanobacteria. Chloroplasts are only found in plants and algae.


Question: When did Konstantin Mereschkowski suggest the origin of chloroplasts?

Answer: 1905

Chloroplasts are one of many types of organelles in the plant cell. They are considered to have originated from cyanobacteria through endosymbiosis—when a eukaryotic cell engulfed a photosynthesizing cyanobacterium that became a permanent resident in the cell. Mitochondria are thought to have come from a similar event, where an aerobic prokaryote was engulfed. <hl> This origin of chloroplasts was first suggested by the Russian biologist Konstantin Mereschkowski in 1905 after Andreas Schimper observed in 1883 that chloroplasts closely resemble cyanobacteria. <hl> Chloroplasts are only found in plants and algae.

Chloroplasts are one of many types of organelles in the plant cell. They are considered to have originated from cyanobacteria through endosymbiosis—when a eukaryotic cell engulfed a photosynthesizing cyanobacterium that became a permanent resident in the cell. Mitochondria are thought to have come from a similar event, where an aerobic prokaryote was engulfed. This origin of chloroplasts was first suggested by the Russian biologist Konstantin Mereschkowski in <hl> 1905 <hl> after Andreas Schimper observed in 1883 that chloroplasts closely resemble cyanobacteria. Chloroplasts are only found in plants and algae.


Question: Who said chloroplasts are similar to cyanobacteria?

Answer: Andreas Schimper

Chloroplasts are one of many types of organelles in the plant cell. They are considered to have originated from cyanobacteria through endosymbiosis—when a eukaryotic cell engulfed a photosynthesizing cyanobacterium that became a permanent resident in the cell. Mitochondria are thought to have come from a similar event, where an aerobic prokaryote was engulfed. <hl> This origin of chloroplasts was first suggested by the Russian biologist Konstantin Mereschkowski in 1905 after Andreas Schimper observed in 1883 that chloroplasts closely resemble cyanobacteria. <hl> Chloroplasts are only found in plants and algae.

Chloroplasts are one of many types of organelles in the plant cell. They are considered to have originated from cyanobacteria through endosymbiosis—when a eukaryotic cell engulfed a photosynthesizing cyanobacterium that became a permanent resident in the cell. Mitochondria are thought to have come from a similar event, where an aerobic prokaryote was engulfed. This origin of chloroplasts was first suggested by the Russian biologist Konstantin Mereschkowski in 1905 after <hl> Andreas Schimper <hl> observed in 1883 that chloroplasts closely resemble cyanobacteria. Chloroplasts are only found in plants and algae.


Question: What are chloroplasts descended from?

Cyanobacteria are considered the ancestors of chloroplasts. They are sometimes called blue-green algae even though they are prokaryotes. They are a diverse phylum of bacteria capable of carrying out photosynthesis, and are gram-negative, meaning that they have two cell membranes. Cyanobacteria also contain a peptidoglycan cell wall, which is thicker than in other gram-negative bacteria, and which is located between their two cell membranes. Like chloroplasts, they have thylakoids within. On the thylakoid membranes are photosynthetic pigments, including chlorophyll a. Phycobilins are also common cyanobacterial pigments, usually organized into hemispherical phycobilisomes attached to the outside of the thylakoid membranes (phycobilins are not shared with all chloroplasts though).

Answer: Cyanobacteria

<hl> Cyanobacteria are considered the ancestors of chloroplasts. <hl> They are sometimes called blue-green algae even though they are prokaryotes. They are a diverse phylum of bacteria capable of carrying out photosynthesis, and are gram-negative, meaning that they have two cell membranes. Cyanobacteria also contain a peptidoglycan cell wall, which is thicker than in other gram-negative bacteria, and which is located between their two cell membranes. Like chloroplasts, they have thylakoids within. On the thylakoid membranes are photosynthetic pigments, including chlorophyll a. Phycobilins are also common cyanobacterial pigments, usually organized into hemispherical phycobilisomes attached to the outside of the thylakoid membranes (phycobilins are not shared with all chloroplasts though).

<hl> Cyanobacteria <hl> are considered the ancestors of chloroplasts. They are sometimes called blue-green algae even though they are prokaryotes. They are a diverse phylum of bacteria capable of carrying out photosynthesis, and are gram-negative, meaning that they have two cell membranes. Cyanobacteria also contain a peptidoglycan cell wall, which is thicker than in other gram-negative bacteria, and which is located between their two cell membranes. Like chloroplasts, they have thylakoids within. On the thylakoid membranes are photosynthetic pigments, including chlorophyll a. Phycobilins are also common cyanobacterial pigments, usually organized into hemispherical phycobilisomes attached to the outside of the thylakoid membranes (phycobilins are not shared with all chloroplasts though).


Question: What type of organism are cyanobacteria?

Answer: prokaryotes

Cyanobacteria are considered the ancestors of chloroplasts. <hl> They are sometimes called blue-green algae even though they are prokaryotes . <hl> They are a diverse phylum of bacteria capable of carrying out photosynthesis, and are gram-negative, meaning that they have two cell membranes. Cyanobacteria also contain a peptidoglycan cell wall, which is thicker than in other gram-negative bacteria, and which is located between their two cell membranes. Like chloroplasts, they have thylakoids within. On the thylakoid membranes are photosynthetic pigments, including chlorophyll a. Phycobilins are also common cyanobacterial pigments, usually organized into hemispherical phycobilisomes attached to the outside of the thylakoid membranes (phycobilins are not shared with all chloroplasts though).

Cyanobacteria are considered the ancestors of chloroplasts. They are sometimes called blue-green algae even though they are <hl> prokaryotes <hl>. They are a diverse phylum of bacteria capable of carrying out photosynthesis, and are gram-negative, meaning that they have two cell membranes. Cyanobacteria also contain a peptidoglycan cell wall, which is thicker than in other gram-negative bacteria, and which is located between their two cell membranes. Like chloroplasts, they have thylakoids within. On the thylakoid membranes are photosynthetic pigments, including chlorophyll a. Phycobilins are also common cyanobacterial pigments, usually organized into hemispherical phycobilisomes attached to the outside of the thylakoid membranes (phycobilins are not shared with all chloroplasts though).

They are sometimes called blue-green algae even though they are <hl> prokaryotes <hl> .


Question: What does 'gram-negative' mean?

Answer: they have two cell membranes

Cyanobacteria are considered the ancestors of chloroplasts. They are sometimes called blue-green algae even though they are prokaryotes. <hl> They are a diverse phylum of bacteria capable of carrying out photosynthesis, and are gram-negative, meaning that they have two cell membranes . <hl> Cyanobacteria also contain a peptidoglycan cell wall, which is thicker than in other gram-negative bacteria, and which is located between their two cell membranes. Like chloroplasts, they have thylakoids within. On the thylakoid membranes are photosynthetic pigments, including chlorophyll a. Phycobilins are also common cyanobacterial pigments, usually organized into hemispherical phycobilisomes attached to the outside of the thylakoid membranes (phycobilins are not shared with all chloroplasts though).

Cyanobacteria are considered the ancestors of chloroplasts. They are sometimes called blue-green algae even though they are prokaryotes. They are a diverse phylum of bacteria capable of carrying out photosynthesis, and are gram-negative, meaning that <hl> they have two cell membranes <hl>. Cyanobacteria also contain a peptidoglycan cell wall, which is thicker than in other gram-negative bacteria, and which is located between their two cell membranes. Like chloroplasts, they have thylakoids within. On the thylakoid membranes are photosynthetic pigments, including chlorophyll a. Phycobilins are also common cyanobacterial pigments, usually organized into hemispherical phycobilisomes attached to the outside of the thylakoid membranes (phycobilins are not shared with all chloroplasts though).

They are a diverse phylum of bacteria capable of carrying out photosynthesis, and are gram-negative, meaning that <hl> they have two cell membranes <hl> .


Question: What kind of cell wall do cyanobacteria have?

Answer: peptidoglycan

Cyanobacteria are considered the ancestors of chloroplasts. They are sometimes called blue-green algae even though they are prokaryotes. They are a diverse phylum of bacteria capable of carrying out photosynthesis, and are gram-negative, meaning that they have two cell membranes. <hl> Cyanobacteria also contain a peptidoglycan cell wall, which is thicker than in other gram-negative bacteria, and which is located between their two cell membranes. <hl> Like chloroplasts, they have thylakoids within. On the thylakoid membranes are photosynthetic pigments, including chlorophyll a. Phycobilins are also common cyanobacterial pigments, usually organized into hemispherical phycobilisomes attached to the outside of the thylakoid membranes (phycobilins are not shared with all chloroplasts though).

Cyanobacteria are considered the ancestors of chloroplasts. They are sometimes called blue-green algae even though they are prokaryotes. They are a diverse phylum of bacteria capable of carrying out photosynthesis, and are gram-negative, meaning that they have two cell membranes. Cyanobacteria also contain a <hl> peptidoglycan <hl> cell wall, which is thicker than in other gram-negative bacteria, and which is located between their two cell membranes. Like chloroplasts, they have thylakoids within. On the thylakoid membranes are photosynthetic pigments, including chlorophyll a. Phycobilins are also common cyanobacterial pigments, usually organized into hemispherical phycobilisomes attached to the outside of the thylakoid membranes (phycobilins are not shared with all chloroplasts though).


Question: How are cyanobacteria sometimes wrongly described?

Answer: blue-green algae

Cyanobacteria are considered the ancestors of chloroplasts. <hl> They are sometimes called blue-green algae even though they are prokaryotes. <hl> They are a diverse phylum of bacteria capable of carrying out photosynthesis, and are gram-negative, meaning that they have two cell membranes. Cyanobacteria also contain a peptidoglycan cell wall, which is thicker than in other gram-negative bacteria, and which is located between their two cell membranes. Like chloroplasts, they have thylakoids within. On the thylakoid membranes are photosynthetic pigments, including chlorophyll a. Phycobilins are also common cyanobacterial pigments, usually organized into hemispherical phycobilisomes attached to the outside of the thylakoid membranes (phycobilins are not shared with all chloroplasts though).

Cyanobacteria are considered the ancestors of chloroplasts. They are sometimes called <hl> blue-green algae <hl> even though they are prokaryotes. They are a diverse phylum of bacteria capable of carrying out photosynthesis, and are gram-negative, meaning that they have two cell membranes. Cyanobacteria also contain a peptidoglycan cell wall, which is thicker than in other gram-negative bacteria, and which is located between their two cell membranes. Like chloroplasts, they have thylakoids within. On the thylakoid membranes are photosynthetic pigments, including chlorophyll a. Phycobilins are also common cyanobacterial pigments, usually organized into hemispherical phycobilisomes attached to the outside of the thylakoid membranes (phycobilins are not shared with all chloroplasts though).