If you keep looking you will find that a lot more than the global governance
aspects of the global warming debate are covered here.
One very frustrating and confusing
aspect of the global warming debate is the idea's generally supported by warmists to replace fossil fuel for energy.
Not exact matches
Facts and anecdotes examine the historic, scientific, economic, political, cultural, and literary
aspects of coal, as well as the current
debates about energy consumption, developing nations, and
global warming.
Update, June 19, 10:30 p.m. Joe Romm has written a long post on Climate Progress on the Orwellian
aspects of a «good» Anthropocene — «Words Matter When Talking
Global Warming: The «Good Anthropocene»
Debate» — and Hamilton has a long essay in Scientific American warning that «The New Environmentalism Will Lead Us to Disaster.
These are very recent results, and
aspects of them are still under
debate.3 But the basic message for non-statisticians is clear: Three hot summers don't mean
global warming, nor do three cold winters mean a new ice age.
And I don't often question your reasoning w / r / t the science, per se, but on your arguments w / r / t the social
aspects of the
debate and on a few occasions, the rhetoric
of your scientific arguments (such as your acceptance
of arguments about a «pause» in «
global warming.»
I have pointed out flaws that I see in certain
aspects of the
debate, but the central tenant
of global warming I have not really written much on.
The conference's theme was «Climate Change: Scientific
Debate and Economic Analysis» to reflect Heartland's belief that that «scientific debate is not over,» and it was designed to «call attention to widespread dissent to the asserted «consensus» on various aspects of climate change and global warming.&
Debate and Economic Analysis» to reflect Heartland's belief that that «scientific
debate is not over,» and it was designed to «call attention to widespread dissent to the asserted «consensus» on various aspects of climate change and global warming.&
debate is not over,» and it was designed to «call attention to widespread dissent to the asserted «consensus» on various
aspects of climate change and
global warming.»
However, climate scientists — including at least one who has disputed
aspects of the scientific consensus on
global warming — completely reject the notion that short - term changes in weather, let alone an individual winter storm in January, bear any relevance to the
global warming debate.