Sentences with phrase «climate skeptic groups»

«Climate Skeptic Groups Launch Global Anti-Science Campaign,» Bloomberg Business, September 19, 2013.

A recent story in the Los Angeles Times provided an update on the funding behind two associated climate skeptic groups that have been involved in attacks on clean energy in Ohio.

You might not be like that, I am just describing the bulk of the climate skeptic group out there as I see it.

«While there's nothing controversial in the letter, please keep it in confidence» a Latham & Watkins writes, forwarding a signed invitation by Nigel Lawson for Scott Pruitt to address the U.K.'s premier climate skeptic group.

Climate skeptic group works to reverse renewable energy mandates.

Not exact matches

The beachhead groups were part of a larger constellation of advisers, including Oklahoma oil and gas mogul Harold Hamm (once considered for energy secretary), billionaire investor Carl Icahn (last seen shadily pushing for policy that would benefit his oil refineries), GOP energy lobbyist Mike McKenna (in charge of the DOE transition team), longtime climate skeptic (and hopeless dope) Myron Ebell, North Dakota Rep. Kevin Cramer (the oil devotee who supposedly wrote Trump's big energy speech last May), and Thomas J. Pyle, the director of the Institute for Energy Research (IER), a pro-fossil fuel «think tank» which, as we shall see, has provided several Trump staffers.

The strident attempt to silence the skeptics who question the popular thesis that humans are adversely affecting the earth's climate hit a new high over the past couple of weeks with the release of the Berkeley Earth Surface Temperature Project (BEST) report from a group of scientists centered....

A 30 percent cut in emissions from 2005 levels by 2030 is a big number — less than environmental groups want but far more than the president can get via Congress, where climate change skeptics rule the House and the Democratic Senate so far avoiding bringing a climate change bill to the floor during Obama's presidency.

In both cases, environmental groups described the Republican candidates as climate skeptics.

«The language style used by climate change skeptics suggests that the arguments put forth by these groups may be less credible in that they are relatively less focused upon the propagation of evidence and more intent on refuting the opposing perspective,» said Pennycook.

Bill Hare, who leads a group of top climate scientists and economists at Berlin - based Climate Analytics who helped produce the UNEP gap report, said Geden's accusations «could not be more wrong» and lumped the researcher in with climate skeptics and other naysayers «who systematically downplay the risks of climate change and argue against action to reduce emissions on spurious and ill - founded grounds.climate scientists and economists at Berlin - based Climate Analytics who helped produce the UNEP gap report, said Geden's accusations «could not be more wrong» and lumped the researcher in with climate skeptics and other naysayers «who systematically downplay the risks of climate change and argue against action to reduce emissions on spurious and ill - founded grounds.Climate Analytics who helped produce the UNEP gap report, said Geden's accusations «could not be more wrong» and lumped the researcher in with climate skeptics and other naysayers «who systematically downplay the risks of climate change and argue against action to reduce emissions on spurious and ill - founded grounds.climate skeptics and other naysayers «who systematically downplay the risks of climate change and argue against action to reduce emissions on spurious and ill - founded grounds.climate change and argue against action to reduce emissions on spurious and ill - founded grounds.»

In the area of climate change, the leaked documents revealed that the group funds vocal climate skeptics, including Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change founder Craig Idso ($ 11,600 per month), physicist Fred Singer ($ 5,000 plus expenses per month), and New Zealand geologist Robert Carter ($ 1,667 per month).

Attracted to fringe scientists like the small and vocal group of climate skeptics, Republicans appear to be alienated from a mainstream scientific community that by and large doesn't share their political beliefs.

We had firsthand experience dealing with climate skeptics, amplified by advocacy groups like the Competitive Enterprise Institute and a lot of the think tanks that were allegedly funded by ExxonMobil and other firms.

In an interesting paper that appeared in the journal Global Environmental Change, a group of scholars, including Naomi Oreskes, a historian of science at Harvard, and Michael Oppenheimer, a geoscientist at Princeton, note that so - called climate skeptics frequently accuse climate scientists of «alarmism» and «overreacting to evidence of human impacts on the climate system.»

Some so called climate skeptics are indeed politically and economically motivated; so are environmental pressure groups.

To be entirely clear; group A contains any kind of activist while group B contains both «climate skeptics» (except, of course, those who fit in group A) and people supporting the general paradigm of «global warming / antropogenic climate change» (again not those in group A).

don't forget: it was a a group of sophisticated ny'ers who voted that the skeptics (lindzen, crichton, etc.) won the intelligence squared debate last april about whether climate was a «crisis.»

The fund is designed to help scientists like Professor Michael Mann cope with the legal fees that stack up in fighting attempts by climate - skeptic groups to gain access to private emails and other correspondence through lawsuits and Freedom of Information Act requests at their public universities.

Muller was a climate skeptic and pulled together a group of scientists and mathematicians and reanalyzed all the data.

Here is an interesting link that was posted by Richard Courtney on the Yahoo Group Climate Skeptics.

For years, skeptics have filled comments with dismissive views of climate science to sow doubts about the consensus that fossil fuels are responsible for global warming — dominating that space, according to the group.

Many skeptics — in particular, a group called «lukewarmers,» for instance Matt Ridley — claim that it is on the lower end of that range and therefore climate change is less of a worry.

Up here in Alberta a new group of climate skeptics are up and runnging.

He then went on to respond to an environmental group's work to «discredit the testimony of James Taylor of the Heartland Institute,» a climate skeptic think tank that

Richard Lindzen was part of a group of climate change skeptics to speak at a «climate summit» arranged by the Texas Public Policy Foundation shortly before the UN climate summit in Paris.

He then went on to respond to an environmental group's work to «discredit the testimony of James Taylor of the Heartland Institute,» a climate skeptic think tank that received $ 676,500 from ExxonMobil from 1998 to 2006.

The company's support for a small, but influential, group of climate skeptics has damaged the United States» reputation by making our government appear to ignore conclusive data on climate change and the disastrous effects climate change could have.»

The New York Supreme Court has ordered Attorney General Eric Schneiderman to turn over a document containing a secret agreement with other states and environmental activist groups regarding the witch hunt being carried out against Exxon and other climate skeptics.

For a certain time, the problem was framed as an issue of mainstream scientists, supporting the concept of anthropogenic climate change, versus a group of skeptics, who doubted the reality of the blade of the hockey stick.

So what we have is someone who is clearly identified with an in - group (in your case «skeptics») and who asserts an asymmetry in the climate change domain that qualitatively elevates his own identity group over the out - group («realists»), asserting a cultural cognition bias in someone that he feels is identified with that out - group (without even an attempt to explain the basis for such a determination *), even those that person isn't asserting such a qualitative elevation of his own in - group.

These two corporations are infamous for their funding of climate change «skeptic» think tanks and front groups.

«Climategate», or «Swifthack» was a media story about a set of hacked emails that was pushed by a group of avid climate skeptics, including bloggers Steven Mosher, Steve McIntyre, Ross McKitrick, Patrick Condon, Lucia Liljegren, Charles Rotter and Anthony Watts.

The hacker gave the file to a small group of climate skeptics, who pored over it to pick out potentially controversial snippets.

The hacker created a 61 mb file from this data and gave it to a small group of climate skeptics and «lukewarmers», who pored over it to pick out potentially controversial snippets.

Wow, its sure good that the world has decided that skeptics are the mindless, thuggish, anti-science side of this debate, because if that had not already been made clear, we might think that key climate alarmism groups had lost their freaking minds.

Just when we thought the op - ed letter couldn't get worse, these fake skeptics have the gall to suggest that we «follow the money,» because climate «alarmism» supposedly brings bountiful research funding, «an excuse for governments to raise taxes», «big donations» for environmental groups, and other similar tinfoil - hattery.

As they tend to do from time to time in an effort to distract from the climate science consensus, a group of scientists who are also climate «skeptics» have published an opinion - editorial (op - ed), trying to make the case against taking action to address climate change.

«Scientific advocacy, environmental interest groups, and climate change: are climate skeptic portrayals of climate scientists as biased accurate?.»

Adding to the conflicts, Hoggan is also chair of the board of directors for the David Suzuki Foundation, a radical environmental activist group run by a man who — ironically — calls for climate skeptics to join Lefebvre in jail.

The UCS web page, «Global Warming Skeptic Organizations,» lists all the groups that take oil industry money to spread propaganda about the climate change threat and the underpinning science.

Conclusion The third entry in this series will examine additional tactics in the climate change disinformation campaign that will include; manufacturing bogus science, think tank campaigns, misleading PR campaigns, the use of Astroturf groups, and cyber-bullying scientists and journalists The last entry in the series will identify ethical norms that should guide climate skeptics in light of the experience with the climate change disinformation campaign discussed in this series..

We learned from the PBS» «Climate of Doubt» that during the last four years, the momentum was lost by those who called for climate action and gained by a small group of skeptics who rallied the Tea Party grassroots movement to push the issue off the Climate of Doubt» that during the last four years, the momentum was lost by those who called for climate action and gained by a small group of skeptics who rallied the Tea Party grassroots movement to push the issue off the climate action and gained by a small group of skeptics who rallied the Tea Party grassroots movement to push the issue off the agenda.

And it isn't just De Frietas, unfortunately I think this group also includes a member of my own department... The skeptics appear to have staged a «coup» at «Climate Research» (it was a mediocre journal to begin with, but now its a mediocre journal with a definite «purpose»).

The investigative blogger Deep Climate has been working to set the record straight on how an orchestrated campaign by members of Congress, industry - funded global warming denialist groups and PR operatives, and professional «skeptics» has spread misleading information about the paleoclimate... Continue reading →

The Global Warming Policy Foundation (GWPF), Lord Lawson's UK - based climate skeptic lobby group, has announced it is launching an inquiry into the integrity of global surface temperature records.

Lord Lawson's skeptic lobby group, the Global Warming Policy Foundation (GWPF), released a report today criticising scientists» estimate of how sensitive earth's climate is to carbon dioxide.

«A group of climate skeptics who weighed in on climate lawsuits in California revealed their recent funding, and court documents show their donors are a mix of fossil fuel companies and conservative think tanks.»

By calling the science «still incomplete,» Bush also lent new credibility to the tiny handful of industry - sponsored «greenhouse skeptics» who have been thoroughly discredited by the mainstream community of climate researchers — including the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), the National Academy of Sciences and other blue - ribbon scientific groups that deem global warming to be real, immediate and oclimate researchers — including the UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), the National Academy of Sciences and other blue - ribbon scientific groups that deem global warming to be real, immediate and oClimate Change (IPCC), the National Academy of Sciences and other blue - ribbon scientific groups that deem global warming to be real, immediate and ominous.

Folk on here are fond of telling me climate skeptics are not a monolithic group, don't all believe the same thing, etc..