Sentences with phrase «climate doom as»

Will they be as assiduous in grading pieces that overstate the significance of some single - study finding pointing to climate doom as they are with coverage challenging climate alarm?

Not exact matches

As paleoclimatologist Michael Mann of Penn State University said of the New York article, overstating the severity of climate change could feed a «paralyzing narrative of doom and hopelessness.»

As historian Sam White explains in A Cold Welcome, most early attempts were doomed by fatally incorrect assumptions about geography and climate, poor planning and bad timing.

The climate treaty being hammered out this month at The Hague may be doomed to failure, as numerous observers say the United States simply won't ratify any treaty that requires such wrenching reductions in carbon emissions, and if the United States bails out, the protocol is in very deep trouble.

But on a planet with a warming climate, these same adaptations could spell the bird's doom: The ptarmigan's range is severely limited by its sole dependence on alpine habitat, which is shrinking as hotter temperatures sneak up the mountainsides, threatening to push the treeline — and the ptarmigan — to ever - higher elevations, until there's no more room to rise.

-- but $ upercapitalist seems more doomed than most, as an on - the - cheap attempt to update the moral drama of Wall Street for the current economic climate.

While libraries have done well for themselves despite the dire predictions of doom following the digital revolution — largely by reinventing themselves as providers of other community needs while still making books their focus — there have been some highly ominous predictions for libraries in the current political climate.

Slickly written blogs and sites against the wording from here make me realise how easy is it for a not skeptical enough mind (scientifically that is before you all jump on me) to take the bait and start thinking that doom in accelerating when indeed its just that as real climate have been stating for ever makre sure your time series is long enough to flush out the natural variability.

But in the debate over a response to global warming, there were blinders on a lot of Democrats, as well — blinders that resulted for far too long in a one - solution focus on a comprehensive, and doomed, cap - and - trade climate bill.

A spokesperson, identified as a «warning preparedness meteorologist» from Environment Canada threatened us with climate doom, but only managed to show total ignorance of climate science.

A full computer screen of continuous text lines (with NO white space between any of those lines) is almost as scary as climate doom.

As for my interest in the other side, that would be the side of light of course, while the dark side is where we find you groping about, led by the specious prognostications of AGW priests professing doom and gloom from their pseudoscientific crystal balls (aka climate models) if we don't lead a more sustainable life.

Acceptance of clearly erroneous papers, such as those from Mann et al., pasted - together climate reconstructions, a tendency to jump on every temperature blip as proof of imminent catastrophe, etc. all serve to show that the community is less interested in communicating the truth than it is in maintaining a narrative of impending doom.

I have gotten somewhat more educated after lurking here and on the science of doom site as well as climate audit.

But what if, as the real world evidence increasingly suggests, your prognostications of climate doom are flat out wrong?

So the major climate doom we face is that taxpayers and ratepayers will end up paying out enormous sums as a result of politicians that foolishly listened to the climate doomsayers.

As the chances of a cap - and - trade bill recede in the 111th Congress, expect the increasingly desperate greens to amp up their gloom - and - doom rhetoric — as they already have... reality will matter less and less to climate alarmists as their visions of cap - and - trade in this Congress, once a sure bet, fade awaAs the chances of a cap - and - trade bill recede in the 111th Congress, expect the increasingly desperate greens to amp up their gloom - and - doom rhetoric — as they already have... reality will matter less and less to climate alarmists as their visions of cap - and - trade in this Congress, once a sure bet, fade awaas they already have... reality will matter less and less to climate alarmists as their visions of cap - and - trade in this Congress, once a sure bet, fade awaas their visions of cap - and - trade in this Congress, once a sure bet, fade away.

So please stop using the impending «model predicted doom» as an excuse for your inability to match the trajectory of various global climate parameters with predictions.

It has always amazed me, Andy, or would if there was anything left in climate psyence that could, that people leap and down and point to trees or dead bodies that suddenly appear from retreating glaciers as evidence that it is all worse than we thought and we are all doomed, etc, without apparently drawing the obvious conclusion that at some stage in the past that bit of countryside must have been able to support life.

Using them to predict real data retrospectively is hopeless and World leading climate scientists as they are admit they are way too hot but it's ok we are still doomed but we have a few more years to spend time deindustrialising the West Building more windmills and solar panels and buying stupid electric cars before we all die.

To suggest that coastlines aren't quite as perilous as green activists claim, that the government shouldn't be picking winners, or that cheaper energy might be more helpful to poor people than mitigating climate change was to «deny science», and to be victim of some horrific right wing ideology that would make Hitler's crimes against humanity look like a summer picnic... Climate sceptics were inviting certaiclimate change was to «deny science», and to be victim of some horrific right wing ideology that would make Hitler's crimes against humanity look like a summer picnic... Climate sceptics were inviting certaiClimate sceptics were inviting certain doom.

We have pointed out many times before that public statements on climate rarely match the reality of what has been said by the IPCC, even when it's high - profile scientists (such as Lord Ma y, or Lord Rees), not politicians, who are doing the doom - saying.

We have all heard the arguments surrounding climate change, from impending doom and draconian GHG reduction measures at one end of the spectrum to the destruction of the global economy and the characterization of global warming as fiction, at the other end.

I think the language of catastrophism, chaos, doom — whatever you like to call it — has actually sobered up, in the UK at least, having peaked about three or four years ago when newspapers such as The Independent ran dramatic front pages on a regular basis, a new umbrella body for activists called Stop Climate Chaos came into existence, Roland Emmerich had the Atlantic Ocean freezing in an instant in The Day After tomorrow, and a leading thinktank lambasted a portion of the British press for indulging in «climate porn&Climate Chaos came into existence, Roland Emmerich had the Atlantic Ocean freezing in an instant in The Day After tomorrow, and a leading thinktank lambasted a portion of the British press for indulging in «climate porn&climate porn».

Like that doomed bunny, we are transfixed by fashionable «issues» and just not seeing the political world — much as most climate scientists shun looking at the physical world.

This is not an article remotely interested in the actual species Ursus maritimus, only the fantasy creature that appears in David Attenborough documentaries and the like in order to serve one overriding purpose: to act as the cute, fluffy, white ursine harbinger of man - made climate doom.

If the traditional media either ignore you entirely (because you are just some «stupid blog», as many in the MSM would put it) or (if they don't ignore you) choose to represent the climate change issue as «he said / she said» (as the MSM have done, by and large) your efforts at countering lies are doomed to fail.

I though the idea was to have a report which had «errors or statements that are still unbalanced» as long as they support climate doom, becasue it odd they never go the other way.