Sentences with phrase «by global warming proponents»

Jammy Dodger, I published it because the results were gotten via a methodology commonly accepted by global warming proponents.

Temperature records have been adjusted by global warming proponents to reduce past temperatures and incease more recent temperatures to attempt to show increases.

Increases in cataclysmic weather events predicted by global warming proponents have not occurred, while CO2 has continued to increase.

That downwelling happens constantly even at night and worldwide and it has been theorised by global warming proponents that extra downwelling infrared from more greenhouse gases is at the heart of the proposed climate effect from human sources of CO2.

Another science often ignored by global warming proponents is geology, especially as it relates to plate tectonics.

Not exact matches

But with its capital often choked by smog and its people angry about the environmental degradation that rapid development has wrought across the country, Beijing has become a strong proponent of efforts to halt global warming.

Scientists knew about the warming effects of greenhouse gases, but proponents of global cooling argued that greenhouse warming would be more than offset by Earth's orbital changes.

But with its capital often choked by smog and its people angry about the environmental degradation that rapid development has wrought across the country, Beijing has become a strong proponent of efforts to halt global warming.

More broadly scoped, a variety of factors are present, some of which are widely used by skeptics of global warming, and others which are used by proponents.

In case you missed it in 2009, here's a commencement speech addressed to the Class of 2099 by Danny Bloom of Taiwan, one of Dot Earth's most avid early contributors and a proponent of «Polar Cities» as a response to global warming:

UPDATE, 5/17/09: Here's a commencement speech addressed to the Class of 2099 by Danny Bloom of Taiwan, one of Dot Earth's most avid contributors and a proponent of «Polar Cities» as a response to global warming:

By the way, most scientists here are not «proponents» of global warming, as in «they are in favor of it in order to advance some political or personal agenda.»

«attack the proponents [by comparing] global warming to historical or mythical instances of gloom and doom.»

My sarcasm is driven by cynicism because the AG's actions are a sure sign of the failure of proponents of anthropogenic global warming (AGW).

Proponents of the IPCC and their anthropogenic global warming (AGW) hypothesis continue their crusade (pun intended) by inveigling the support of authority figures, like the Pope and by inference, associated groups.

This adjacent plot of 5 - year temperature change versus 5 - year atmospheric CO2 level change is based on the most recent empirical evidence published by the government's GISS / NASA scientists (and they happen to be some of the largest proponents of chicken little global warming calamities).

A cache of leaked emails that show some leading global warming theory proponents acting less than nobly has caught the attention not only of the New York Times but also of the Charlottesville - based scientist often slammed by the errant emailers.

It is implied by some AGW (Anthropogenic Global Warming) proponents that the proportion of CO2 in the air is a critical determinant of temperature but both Venus and Mars have over 90 % of their air as CO2 yet their temperatures are very different.

Our review suggests that the dissenting view offered by the skeptics or opponents of global warming appears substantially more credible than the supporting view put forth by the proponents of global warming.

Every time the evidentiary basis of AGW is knocked out from under it, its proponents simply change the name (e.g.: «Global Warming» becomes «Climate Change») or the predicted effects of AGW («the earth's temperature will rise by X degrees» becomes «the earth's temperature will maybe rise or fall by X degrees»).

Newsweek's Global Warming Blunder http://archive.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2007/8/6/100434.shtml?s=us «Newsweek reporter Eve Conant was given the documentation showing that proponents of man - made global warming have been funded to the tune of $ 50 billion in the last decade or so, while skeptics have received a paltry $ 19 million by comparison.&Global Warming Blunder http://archive.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2007/8/6/100434.shtml?s=us «Newsweek reporter Eve Conant was given the documentation showing that proponents of man - made global warming have been funded to the tune of $ 50 billion in the last decade or so, while skeptics have received a paltry $ 19 million by comparison.Warming Blunder http://archive.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2007/8/6/100434.shtml?s=us «Newsweek reporter Eve Conant was given the documentation showing that proponents of man - made global warming have been funded to the tune of $ 50 billion in the last decade or so, while skeptics have received a paltry $ 19 million by comparison.&global warming have been funded to the tune of $ 50 billion in the last decade or so, while skeptics have received a paltry $ 19 million by comparison.warming have been funded to the tune of $ 50 billion in the last decade or so, while skeptics have received a paltry $ 19 million by comparison.»

It is my contention (and that of many others) that in fact this is the default null hypothesis and until proponents of the anthropogenic global warming hyothesis come up with some better evidence to back up their claims of imminent dangerous warming driven by co2 and a water vapour feedback to its increasing levels, the null hypothesis is the best one we have.

Recent examples include a campaign to censor a Washington Post column by Dr. Charles Krauthammer, a Los Angeles Times protocol of not publishing letters skeptical of global warming, and a lawsuit to discredit the brilliant satirist Mark Steyn, who, as humorists are wont to do, mocked a pompous proponent of global warming.

All the changes made by the IPCC and proponents of the anthropogenic global warming theory (AGW) were not done to adjust to new evidence or correct previous errors.

Recently, two science articles based on the latest research belies the notion, held by global warming alarmist proponents, that climate change is only a result of modern human CO2 emissions.

Their work challenged attempts to get rid of the MWP because it contradicted the claim by the proponents of anthropogenic global warming (AGW).

This is sound and well established science and is relied by upon the proponents of Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW) to explain why they believe the Earth is warmed by human emissions of Greenhouse Gases (GHGs) to a temperature higher than it would be if we were not releasing emissions.

Also, since you agree with P&O's description of how the greenhouse effect works (i.e. downward long - wave radiation warms the lower atmosphere and the ground), will you retract statements like the following «-LSB-...] I demonstrate that the down - welling radiation hypothesis divulged by the proponents of the anthropogenic global warming [is] incompatible with the laws of thermodynamics.»

It doesn't matter; non-AGW scientists are «proving a negative» since they indulged AGW without requiring proponents prove it as an alternative hypothesis by standard methods, and so now they attribute EVERYTHING to global warming — that's why now they call it «Climate Change,» i.e. since now they claim that hot and cold are caused by human pollution; i.e. they keep moving the goalposts so that everything's a touchdown.