Sentences with phrase «arguments against global warming»

We have a lot of work to do so if you want to reject the science and regurgitate long - debunked arguments against global warming, go elsewhere.

But 24 articles in 18 different journals, collectively making several different arguments against global warming, expose that claim as false.

In any case, as one of those rare contrarian climate scientists, Spencer is in a good position to present the best arguments against the global warming consensus.

One of the sturdiest pillars of the argument against global warming has crumbled under the weight of some 10 million newly compiled measurements of ocean temperature.

In the «90s, the argument against global warming disappeared, so the debate shifted to «The earth is warming, but it's not our fault.»

Tim Lambert reports on the worst argument against global warming, ever.

Have you heard anything about the global climate data cited in this editorial that just came out - or what would you say to this argument against global warming?

Not exact matches

The mounting evidence for climate change, and all its tragic consequences, has provided a powerful argument against fossil fuel power stations: the burning of coal, gas and oil releases carbon dioxide into the atmosphere and this is almost certainly responsible for global warming.

At the time, global warming skeptics used it to support arguments against climate change.

Do these ocean findings finally lay to rest any arguments against anthropogenic global warming, according to news coverage claims?

Some decades ago a «climate skeptic» could make reasoned arguments against the reality of global warming from fossil fuel burning.

The two most common arguments against warming theories seem to be (1) local temperature variations (or mutually - inconclusive data) disprove global warming itself; and (2) models aren't real science, anyway, so we don't need to worry about them.

A valuable short paper that has been accepted for publication in Geophysical Research Letters (subscription required) makes a strong case against presenting any argument about human - driven global warming that's based on short - term trends (a decade or so).

Probably everyone has heard this argument, presented as objection against the findings of climate scientists on global warming: «The climate has always changed!»

But the new work did seem a lot more scientifically rigorous than most previous arguments against a link between global warming and hurricanes; which simply state we don't know enough about past hurricane activity to determine whether modern hurricane activity is unprecedented.

If we could get rid of the worst one - third of the arguments against anthropogenic global warming, that would be progress.

And the cost of the deaths that will inevitably ensue from global warming out weigh any fiscal or other argument against stopping global warming.

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 public ever saw scientists who push the idea of man - caused global warming as fringe elements unable to support the merits of their argument against withering criticism, the issue would implode.

Dogma is if you keep refusing to accept our arguments against man - made global warming.

KR - I briefly looked at Spencer Weart and despite being a believer in global warming comes out against a recent argument for the consensus here.

Sen. James «Global warming is a hoax» Inhofe (R - Oklahoma) has never met an argument against climate change too silly and obviously wrong not to repeat.

To some extent, this argument echoes what Exxon lawyers say to defend it against charges that it should have warned its own investors about the risks of global warming.

Filmmaker Rupert Murray takes us on a journey into the heart of climate scepticism to examine the key arguments against man - made global warming and to try to understand the people who are making them.

What the contrarians need is not to win rationally the argument for / against man - made global warming (this has been resolved scientifically) but plant doubt in the public and politicians, because inaction and the status quo is on the side of the traditional energy industry.

I'm not sure what you are trying to accomplish with your argument, Peter, for or against Global Warming, but all you manage to do is make the question a moot point, at most... which is exactly what the answer already does....

They presented arguments against claims that global warming will cause increases in extreme weather events, sea level rise, vector - borne diseases, and species extinction.

Bob gave so much of himself in recent years to holding the line against the false arguments and propaganda that has been so extensively advanced by global warming advocates.

Even more, it was fabulous to away another of their favorite argument myths that they were using against me at the meetings that scientists in the 1970s were proclaiming global cooling, not global warming.

On November 6, 2013, Senator Sheldon Whitehouse (D - R.I.) seemingly channeled Babbitt, expanding the «same kind of arguments they used against acid rain...» line into a 19 minute U.S. Senate speech covering ozone layer depletion, acid rain, and global warming, with the title of «The Deniers» Playbook.»

See also:: Shhhh, We've Got a Secret: Soil Solves Global Warming, Part 1,:: GM Food Debates Heats Up with Global Warming,:: The Argument against GMO Image: Yale Daily News

Yes, I have read arguments why one should deny global warming or actions against it, just not any honest and sane arguments.

Chapter 4 offers forceful responses to standard (and largely mythological) arguments against carbon taxes and chapter 5 delves into some of the psychology that biases many people against using price instruments to address global warming.

«As someone who personally experienced central planning and attempts to organise the whole of society by directives from above, I feel obliged to warn against the arguments and ambitions of the believers in the global warming doctrine.

Much of the public argument against the science indicating that our greenhouse gas emissions are driving global warming has been carried by lobbyists and paid spokesmen who attempt to reposition global warming as theory rather than fact.

I made the point then (and repeat it here) that although this doesn't «disprove» global warming (the globe has warmed and during this warming we have gone from about half a million cars to almost a billion, from about 500 coal - fired power plants to about 23,000 — I'll let you tell me about the growth in the numbers of airplanes, washing machines and data centers...), it is a fairly straightforward argument against high sensitivity of the atmosphere to increasing concentrations of CO2.