Sentences with phrase «global warming science make»

Not exact matches

You likely deny evolution and global warming for no other reason than it makes you uncomfortable and hold science to the impossibly high standard of having to explain every conceivable mystery about the natural World before you will accept it, but some moron at a pulpit doing magic hand signals of a Sundaymorning is enough to convince you he is communicating with some sky - god and turning grocery store bread and wine into flesh and blood.

John Beddington, the UK government's chief scientific adviser, says that climate scientists should be less hostile to doubters who question man - made global warming, and that public confidence in science depends on more openness to varied opinions.

You likely deny global warming for no other reason than it makes you uncomfortable and hold science to the impossibly high standard of having to explain every conceivable mystery about the natural World before you will accept it, but some moron rolling around a floor speaking in tongues is enough to convince you he is channeling a spirit.

Jon, I don't believe in the myth of man - made global warming because the science behind it is bunk — I'm sure you think I'm weird.

Cooney himself made 294 edits to the administration's 364 - page Strategic Plan for the U.S. Climate Change Science Program posted July 24, 2003, «to exaggerate or emphasize scientific uncertainties or to deemphasize or diminish the importance of the human role in global warming,» and Cooney and the CEQ played a role in eliminating climate change sections in the EPA's draft Report on the Environment as well as its National Air Quality and Emissions Trends Report.

While they will certainly miss out on the pleasure and intellectual excitement that come from knowing how the world works, how much science do they actually need to know to make up their minds about the issues surrounding genetic engineering or global warming?

The leak of the Heartland memos — including a disputed one purporting to outline a strategy to pay a Department of Energy contractor to prepare school curriculum teaching children that the science behind man - made global warming is unsettled — rocked the climate world last week when they were released to bloggers.

The main claims of fact he makes in support of his contention that Global Warming science is an «idealogy, underpinned by false assumptions» are:

For years, we at Greenpeace have been working to make public the secret paper trails that show what everyone already knows: climate science deniers - #Fakexperts - are few and far between, and most of them are paid by companies most responsible for global warming to downplay the problem.

To prime the pump, I mentioned a couple of instances that I reported on Dot Earth, including a report estimating 300,000 deaths a year from global warming and contentious statements made about the predicted die - back of the Amazon rain forest at a climate - science summit in Copenhagen early last year.

The authors make it clear that they don't disagree with the reality of global warming, but blogs everywhere are using it as a propaganda tool to paint global warming as a fraud and the climate science community as a bunch of confused clowns.

Climate change skepticism seeps into science classrooms Some states have introduced education standards requiring teachers to defend the denial of man - made global warming.

Re # 8 (and to expand on # 13): I also think that a basic strategy of the global warming deniers is to focus on one aspect of the science over which there is some combination of real and manufactured dispute and then try to make people think that this is the one crucial piece of evidence on which the whole theory of anthropogenic warming rests... and thus that the dispute over this aspect throws the whole theory into question.

Global warming is not rocket science but George Will and a few others make it seem that way.

This opening statement «'' One of the pillars of the case for man - made global warming is a graph nicknamed the hockey stick» states the science education level and the verificational level in relation to reference material of the journalist, IMO.

Finally, we returned to the science, and I addressed a theme that's come up on this blog, and that I think contributes substantially to making the human response to climate change (or global warming) a particularly vexing problem — the reality that while the basics of the science are clear, the science on questions that matter most to society is not.

The main claims of fact he makes in support of his contention that Global Warming science is an «idealogy, underpinned by false assumptions» are:

Those who rail against the media for including too many voices of doubt in some stories on global warming science and policy might want to step back a minute and review the chart below, from last December, showing just how invisible coverage of climate is compared to the stories that make the cut each day.

NASA Reneges on Transparency — Still No DSCOVR Documents Tags: Desmogger, dscovr climate satellite, Government Policy, Mitchell Anderson, Nasa, NASA, NASA climate change, nasa global warming, News We made, Science, Science, US

I wish that people who write articles about global warming and others who affect and make energy policy like the environmentalists and the teary eyed soccer moms who support them, had some training in science, technology and economics.

A new study published Monday in the Proceedings of the National Academies of Science provides the clearest evidence yet that human - induced global warming made that drought more likely.

More than 650 scientists from around the world dispute the claims made by the United Nations and former Vice President Al Gore about global warming, saying that science does not support that climate change is a manmade phenomenon, according to a posting on the Senate environmental committee's press blog.

Just as missing data in some areas of climate science does nt prevent us from making rational statements about global warming, so to the fact of missing mails does not prevent us from describing clearly what we do know about the mails.

Or is Paul defending against the charge by making a numbers argument — the scientists in question are on the same side as the consensus, so to challenge any aspect of global warming science or politics is to make a statement about «the majority of scientists» (many of whom are in fact social scientists)?

If the Authors «want to examine... loci at which scientific knowledge is made,» Why not just say what we already know as «virtually certain»: the ipcc's method is almost exclusively «computer - simulated climate science» = gigo; «Expertly» guided by demonizing CO2 and disasterizing Global Warming and spurred onward always by the ethical maxim that «We «mainstream» Climate Scientists are all gonna die from Green Back Starvation Syndrome if we don't gin up some more demonizing and disasterizing «Climate Science» before it's too late!&science» = gigo; «Expertly» guided by demonizing CO2 and disasterizing Global Warming and spurred onward always by the ethical maxim that «We «mainstream» Climate Scientists are all gonna die from Green Back Starvation Syndrome if we don't gin up some more demonizing and disasterizing «Climate Science» before it's too late!&Science» before it's too late!»?

He adds that he is not making any definitive statements on the science of global warming.

«Ben Santer [federal climatologist] just published a pal - reviewed paper in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Science loudly proclaiming that the dreaded man - made global warming signal has emerged from our naturally chaotic climate... pretty much what he wrote in Naturefor the UN's 1996 edition of this conference, 16 years ago.

What is astonishing about Tol's campaign is that he does not himself deny the physical science of global warming and also admits that the percentage consensus on man - made climate change is in the high nineties.

Dana, I think you are pushing in the right direction with this; heat content is a much more direct measure of the underlying changes to the climate system than average air temperatures and climate science communicators should make heat content their first response to the suggestion that global warming is something that waxes and (allegedly, recently) wanes.

And yes, nowadays, expert scientist John Holdren (Obama's former science Czar), just like his comrade Professor Stephen Schneider, fears not man - made Global Cooling but Global Warming:

They also need to take an aggressive role in calling out other scientists who make dire predictions but don't really understand the science of global warming or the uncertainties.

And to the point that Dr Curry is making, if we want to get politics out of the science of global warming then would it be so bad if we were to politely ask the UN to butt out?

The fact that we can't control China, India, and other countries makes all this discussion, the expensive satellites, expensive super-computer models, and money dumped on climate science an exercise in futility as far as mitigation of global warming is concerned.

Peter Foster: Crazy over climate The Royal Society, the U.K.'s once - venerable academy of science, has arguably lost its collective mind over the theory of projected catastrophic man - made global warming.

Heartland's spokesperson frequently say there is no scientific consensus that most of the global warming of the twentieth century was man - made, or that scientists are able to predict future climate conditions, or, finally, that there is a basis in science or economics for passing laws that would reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

That makes both of them authors of the less than 3 % of peer - reviewed climate science papers rejecting the consensus on human - caused global warming.

For reasons of political necessity, some rightwing politicians occasionally make statements endorsing mainstream science on global warming.

«Climate science does not support the theory of catastrophic human - made global warming — the alleged warming crisis does not exist.»

Dr. S. Fred Singer, one of the world's earliest and most credible critics of the theory that global warming is man - made and dangerous, will be recognized with an award for Lifetime Achievement in Climate Science at an international conference on global warming taking place July 7 — 9 in Las Vegas, Nevada.

Science makes mistakes, as did NASA when it published data on global warming trends in an effort to gauge the warmest years in U.S. history.

If the incoming powers - to - be are uneducated in climate science, let those concerned about global warming make their case, show their facts, convince skeptical people through reason and persuasion.

Also See: Watch Now: Climate Depot's Morano on Fox News Mocking «Climate Astrology»: «This is now akin to the predictions of Nostradamus or the Mayan calendar» — Morano: «There is no way anyone can falsify the global warming theory now because any weather event that happens «proves» their case... Man - made global warming has ceased to be a science, it is now the level of your daily horoscope» — Gore [in 2006 film] did not warn us of extreme blizzards and record cold winters coming»

We're not offering a «counter-claim» about the science, because our position is that even the concrete, incontrovertible, unassailable fact of human influence on global warming and climate change does not, by itself, make a case for action.

Two of three scientists at a session on climate change and society at the Indian Science Congress on Tuesday felt fears of man - made global warming were greatly exaggerated.

• Gore used opinions of government scientists whose work can not verified • The practice of rainmaking is more art than a science • The practice of stopping global warming is more politics than science • Making rain is local • Stopping warming is global • Rainmakers are positive blaming neither man nor nature for a lack of rain • Warm stoppers are negative blaming humanity for causing warming • Rainmakers do not get paid if they do not produce • Warm stoppers are paid to create alarm about warming

Since science is the pursuit of truth and AGW advocacy is anything but; it stands to reason that all efforts to keep the debate out of the scientific arena must be made by the global warming orthodoxy to keep the fraud alive.

The science of climate change «attribution» — linking specific extreme weather events to the effects of global warming — is making substantial progress, so it is becoming increasingly possible for scientists to tie particular weather patterns to climate change.

This recent post via Real Climate Science on NASA tampering of Sea - level rise highlights the blatant malfeasance that these government funded institutions will undertake in order to push the man - made global warming climate change agenda, and keep the «Greatest and most successful pseudoscientific fraud in history» rolling and the billions upon billions of taxpayer funds flowing...

When asked about global warming at a primary debate in April, he said there was a lot of «fluff and theory that has been perpetrated as science to create the perception that somehow this global warming has been entirely man - made.»

Union Minister of State (Independent Charge) for Science & Technology and Earth Sciences, MoS in Prime Ministerâ $ ™ s Office (PMO), Personnel, Public Grievances and Pensions, Space & Atomic Energy Jitendra Singh on Wednesday said that global warming and climate change are man - made phenomena and therefore the remedy also lies to a large extent on greater public [continue reading...]