Sentences with phrase «by climate science denialists»

This is a source of confusion sometimes exploited by climate science denialists.

Not exact matches

But given the talent and accomplishment of RealClimate posters, and the breathtaking developments in climate science lately (the dynamics of subglacial lakes, for instance), sometimes it strikes me as a little sad that you have to devote so much energy to refuting the utter twaddle emitted by denialist nincompoops, time and time again.

It would be good to show the vast volume of work done in climate science supporting the concept of AGW, as some names (and the IPCC) are getting a bit worn over time through having their work (only) seemingly tarnished by the denialist camp.

the fossil fuel industry's climate change denialist propaganda disguised as «science education», and to support actual science (not to mention the survival of the human species) by accepting Laurie David's offer to distribute the DVDs.

I have no idea what you are referring to, except perhaps that the rote regurgitation of long - since and many - times - over debunked denialist nonsense is mercifully (and no doubt laboriously) deleted by the RC moderators — unlike every other open blog on the Internet where any attempt to discuss the science of anthropogenic global warming is quickly drowned out by a torrent of pseudoscience, conspiracy theories, blatant falsehoods, and hate speech against climate scientists.

Earlier this year, he co-wrote an article in the peer - reviewed Chinese Science Bulletin with fellow climate denialists arguing that the IPCC's models are inaccurate and the world won't warm dangerously by the end of the century.

Cook is the bête noire of denialists, being the lead author of a science study finding that 97 per cent of peer reviewed studies on climate change agreed that it was mostly caused by human activity.

They misrepresent the state of climate science, reciting talking points that can be found on any of a number of denialist websites, or heard at conferences sponsored by fossil - fuel funded groups such as the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC).

But again — here we are — showing that denialists will do ANYTHING — go to any level — no matter how low to defeat an ETS or Cap n» Trade by attacking the climate science.

Christensen will be joined by one of his own constituents, Dr Bob Carter, a «science policy advisor» for the Melbourne - based climate science denialist think tank the Institute of Public Affairs (IPA).

And instead of «almost legitimizing denialists,» by failing to confront them aggressively and by the way he has ducked serious discussion of the threat of unchecked climate change, Hansen says: «The president should unequivocally support the climate science community, which is under politically orchestrated assault on the legitimacy of its scientific assessments.

A FEW weeks ago I wrote a story for DeSmogBlog looking at how Lord Christopher Monckton — a poster child of the climate science denialist movement — had agreed to launch a new Australian political party fronted by an anti-Islamist Creationist preacher.

Climate science denialists will often fool people, and sometimes themselves, by cherry - picking the bits of evidence they think fit their argument.

It carries the implication that climate science is otherwise free of debate, and that denialist views, rather than having lost the argument by the standard processes of science, have instead been suppressed by some form of political correctness.

But my real reason for going into the Brisbane Dymocks store was to hunt out a copy of Killing the Earth To Save It, written by UK - based climate science denialist and wind - farm hater James Delingpole.

The Heartland Institute runs annual conferences for climate science denialists attended by contrarians from around the globe.

In February 2012, leaks of documents from the denialist Heartland Institute revealed that they were trying to influence science education, suppress the work of scientists, and paid off many prominent climate deniers, such as Anthony Watts, all in an effort to circumvent the scientific consensus by doing an «end run» of PR and political pressure.

Note also that in their post-Frontline damage control efforts, the climate denialists continued to repeat the «no consensus» myth ad nauseam, including in three seperate blog posts on WattsUpWithThat alone — by the Heartland Institute, its director Joe Bast, and International Climate Science Coalition director Tom climate denialists continued to repeat the «no consensus» myth ad nauseam, including in three seperate blog posts on WattsUpWithThat alone — by the Heartland Institute, its director Joe Bast, and International Climate Science Coalition director Tom Climate Science Coalition director Tom Harris.

In the wake of the political tsunami caused by the UK's decision to leave the EU, a group of climate science denialists has formed to jump enthusiastically onto the Brexit bandwagon.

As science unveils more - and - more climate - change hockey - sticks, having stronger - and - stronger blades — as is concisely summarized by the Pontifical Academy report — the above traits # 1 — # 5 are becoming ever - more - concentrated in denialist demagoguery and astroturfing, eh?

Firstly we have the problem that whenever any climate science makes a reference to denialists or the existence of bought - for opinion within the debate this interpreted broadly (by you and others) as applying to everyone expressing any contrary opinion.

What I am talking about is, that it seems to me that with regard to climate science, this blog spends far too much time responding to the phony, trumped - up «debate» fueled by denialist drivel, and not enough time addressing the legitimate scientific question as to whether it is in fact too late to prevent global warming and climate change that will be catastrophic to human civilization, not to mention the entire Earth's biosphere.

I'll just say that I've seen denialists pointing at some of this articles in The Guardian as a proof that climate science is under question (because EVEN The Guardian has now concerns) and I think people who don't pay much attention to it have actually been misled by the headlines and the comments from skeptics.

The media representation of science to the public is a cartoon version, one that is adeptly exploited by some of the denialist crowd to diminish climate science, and by extension, science as a whole.

CLIMATE science denialist radio host Chris Smith - of the shock - jock variety - got a little upset recently at a decision made quietly more than six months ago by James Cook University in Queensland, Australia.