Skeptical Science previously examined Epstein et al. (2011), which arrived at a much higher estimate of the external costs of coal combustion, mainly due to a higher estimate of (non-CO2) air pollution damages.
Skeptical Science previously examined Epstein et al. (2011), which arrived at a much higher estimate of the external costs of coal combustion, mainly due to a higher estimate of (non-CO2) air pollution damages.
Not exact matches
I have seen people,
previously inclined to believe whatever «
science says,» become
skeptical when they realize that the scientists actually do seem to think that variations in finch beaks or peppered moths, or the mere existence of fossils, proves all the vast claims of «evolution.»
If a
previously unknown Callendar had shown up at any time in the last twenty years attempting to publish papers similar to the ones he actually published in the earlier parts of the 20th century, Callendar's qualifications would undoubtedly lead a Real Climate or
Skeptical Science reader to dismiss him as suffering from Dunning - Kruger syndrome.
Most of my writing has been
previously posted at
Skeptical Science and I will continue to contribute to that excellent project.
We have discussed this announcement
previously, and while it provides a glimmer of hope for injecting some new
science and common sense into the government's social cost of carbon, we are highly
skeptical of a positive outcome.
A chart published
previously by
Skeptical Science illustrates how a short - term trend can be cherry picked from the longer warming signal:
I have attempted to answer the first question
previously in a
Skeptical Science post that discussed the 2012 Nature Climate Change article by Neil Swart and Andrew Weaver.