Sentences with phrase «arguments of climate»

If not, and «skeptics» go back to long - debunked arguments of climate sensitivity below 1 C / doubling, then why would any scientist even want to look at Lewis» unpublished back - of - the - envelope calculations?

They also criticize some of the studies done which purport to show that recent warming is unprecedented, which it is one of the main arguments of climate catastrophists - it seems not to be the case.

The most bizarre aspect of the arguments of Climate Skeptics (as well as the more strident pro-nuclear advocates) is their constant insistence that renewable energy technology can never, ever, provide an economic source of large - scale power.

[Anyone who does not totally understand that, doesn't understand how environmental systems work, nor understand the scientific arguments of climate change!

Following each question is a short explanation of the strong ethical arguments for rejecting the arguments of the climate change policy opponents that have triggered the specific questions.

The filmmaker looked for the scientific evidence behind the arguments of the climate sceptics, and compared these findings with the theories from scientists who have examined the impact of man on global warming.

One of the favorite smears from Dr. Stephan Lewandowsky used to try to diminish the arguments of climate skeptics is to create dodgy psuedo - scientific psychological studies with a bent on trying to prove that skeptics are conspiracy theorists.

Compare the arguments of the climate sceptic Steve McIntyre (McIntyre S, 2008b is a readable introduction.)

It is like the arguments of climate change deniers, or religious fanatics, they are so beyond the realm of logic that the only thing to do really is to mock them.

Individual seasonal weather events such as a «snowmageddon» or heat waves can not be directly attributed to either argument of the climate change debate because such events alone are temporary affects.

Not exact matches

Whilst accepting that there is two sides to every argument / position describing climate change as a big hoax and the depiction of a bleak medieval style future is not responsible analysis of the facts.

Shale: Water First, Leak Later: The Climate Benefits of Shale Gas Could Leak and Wash Awaydiscusses how methane leakage and water usage rates are eroding the climate argument for shaClimate Benefits of Shale Gas Could Leak and Wash Awaydiscusses how methane leakage and water usage rates are eroding the climate argument for shaclimate argument for shale gas.

And it crosses over all these lines: local environmental impact, there's the climate argument, there's the First Nations rights argument, there's the stewardship argument, so it can really draw from a whole wide sector of civil society in the way that the faceless catastrophe of climate change can't.

In the midst of all the cross-currents and arguments about Fed easing, speculation about economic turnarounds and the like, our discipline focuses on what the Market Climate is, rather than what it might or should be.

Advertisements recently released by the Ontario government are, in my opinion, a good example of an emotional argument in favour of a climate change plan.

Out of an abundance of charity to Professor Leach, and with all due respect to his unimpeachable contributions as Chair of the Alberta Climate Leadership Panel, his argument may well rest on a more nuanced political assumption: that Alberta's leadership is required to bring the rest of the provinces along.

Leach's argument, advanced in support of Prime Minister Trudeau's criticism of British Columbia's proposed pipeline safety measures, is that the federal government's climate plan requires Alberta's buy - in, and the price of that buy - in is a pipeline to tidewater.

Politicians who advocate for more bitumen pipelines and LNG exports are making a «have your cake and eat it too argument» because there is no way Canada can meet its climate change commitments under such a scenario says David Hughes, one of the nation's top energy experts.

David had also come across a speech by former BP chief executive, Lord Browne, in which he spoke of the warnings company scientists had sounded about climate change, and how their arguments convinced him that it was wrong to side with climate denial.

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.

I think «green new deal», «green / sustainable growth» and «green jobs» are going to be some of the most attractive arguments for a broad climate coalition, and for an alternative.

Using the example of the current debate surrounding anthropomorphic climate change, Thompson sought to evaluate the argument from authority through a single prism, the way in which science is handled in argumentation about public policy.

(Douglad Carswell will, I am sure, believe it shows he is winning the argument): Hence «Pointing out the scale of climate scepticism among the online opinion formers on the right does not, of course, prove that they are wrong, or right.

In the current climate, it is not only unlikely that voters, or indeed the other Westminster parties would accept an argument by the Conservatives that it is best if they restore to themselves the exclusive power to call an election, and revert to the short - termism and the manipulation of election dates for partisan advantage that they decried just four years ago.

@DrunkCynic well this is the same argument republicans use to counter the idea of climate change.

Mr Halfon summarised his argument for ConHome this morning, so there's not much need to re-state the case for an investigation into the oil market, but it is worth noting the response of the newly appointed Minister of State for Energy and Climate Change, John Hayes.

However, none of the arguments above for expanding Heathrow, rather than Gatwick, is to say that the climate change and other environmental impacts including air quality, CO2 emissions and noise can be ignored.

«From the Right, fringes of the Conservative party and Ukip are parroting the arguments of the most discredited climate change deniers, seizing on any anomaly in the climate data to attempt to discredit the whole,» he said.

The other side of the «green» argument against nuclear power is the fear by some climate scientists that carbon emissions in New York could increase by more than 31 million metric tons during the next two years, if a number of nuclear power plants close.

Capehart's argument is nonsense, as is the whole, «creating a climate of hatred,» theory.

Various justifications for costly climate protection measures were put to participants on a random basis, and the effect of these arguments on their attitudes to climate protection was then estimated.

Garcia categorically disagreed with the argument that climate change falls outside of the federal environmental review process.

Sooner or later, the argument goes, we must send our planet's climate and ourselves past the point of no return — if we haven't done so already.

Addressing the threat of climate change and air pollution, the group says, would be a central argument.

«The language style used by climate change skeptics suggests that the arguments put forth by these groups may be less credible in that they are relatively less focused upon the propagation of evidence and more intent on refuting the opposing perspective,» said Pennycook.

According to some climate scientists, the cold in places like Florida actually could be a sign of warming, rather than an argument against the phenomenon.

According to a new report from the Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment at the London School of Economics and the Grantham Institute for Climate Change at Imperial College London, that argument is half - right.

There are a lot of people with Ph.D. s in physics or chemistry who become interested in the climate change story, read the literature, and follow the blogs — and they're unconvinced by our arguments.

Revesz, for one, calls this argument «literally preposterous,» while David Doniger, director of the Natural Resources Defense Council's climate program, dismisses it as «a dishonest fiction.»

Many of his mistakes are big ones: he bungles the issues involving reserves and resources that are critical to his core argument about oil remaining cheap; he drastically misleads his readers about the extent to which sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxide emissions from coal - burning have been reduced; he trivializes the climate - change risks from coals carbon dioxide emissions by suggesting we know the impacts will be worth only 0.64 cents per kilowatt - hour.

Success is unlikely because Obama could veto those measures, but the strength of opposition, at 49 senators, could continue interparty arguments over climate issues heading into the primary contests next year.

Supporters of the Obama administration's climate rule are already readying their arguments against Trump's expected moves.

«Our work... helps move beyond mere speculation about the economic importance of biodiversity and lends an economic argument to biodiversity preservation for climate protection.»

Jarraud rejected climate sceptics» arguments that the science underlying predictions of man - made climate change was flawed.

O'Leary acknowledged that there is a danger that the positive tone of this report could be misinterpreted to bolster arguments against climate action.

But the arguments are changing as scientists see more evidence of the coming impact of climate change on the Atlantic fisheries.

The argument that Wegman was incapable of putting together the comments on proxies is wishful thinking... Wegman had been involved in organizing climate studies before and this is hardly high level stuff.

As a classic indicator of the modern climate skeptic, he cited the IPCC's conclusions as authority for the points that he believed supported his arguments, but dismissed the IPCC's conclusions for points that did not support his arguments.

This is one of the classic climate skeptic arguments, that climate scientists are claiming that CO2 is 100 % to blame for temperature fluctuations.

Of the many inane arguments that are made against taking action on climate change, perhaps the most fatuous is that the projections climate models offer about the future are too uncertain to justify taking steps that might inconvenience us in the present.