Use bad papers to
claim observational support for Hansen's fantasy, when none exists.
Not exact matches
A
claim that the universe has a preferred direction is not
supported by recent
observational evidence, according to three astronomers who analyzed data from the Very Large Array radio telescope in New Mexico and the WM Keck Telescope in Hawaii.
Observational data seems to
support the
claims — or doesn't contradict it, at least.
Can you provide
observational support for your (non-alarmist)
claim that 30,000 species are going extinct every year from AGW?
Interesting that someone that
claims that ``... Cosmic rays influence our weather...» doesn't understand that the science of whether or not GCR's have any impact is actually the thing in question, with only very limited
observational support for the idea so far and good reasons for why it is unlikely to be a big factor.
This position does not appear to be
supported by any
observational evidence, much like the highly exaggerated
claims concerning the effects of human carbon dioxide emissions on climate.
I showed that using the best
observational estimates of forcing given in the SOD, and the most recent
observational OHU estimates, a heat balance approach estimates ECS to be 1.6 — 1.7 °C — well below the «likely» range of 2 — 4.5 °C that the SOD
claims (in Section 10.8.2.5) is
supported by the
observational evidence, and little more than half the best estimate of circa 3 °C it gives.