Sentences with phrase «few other climate scientists»

But he also saw a chance to develop a niche in a region where few other climate scientists were active.

Not exact matches

Here's an excellent example of how to write really well and thus communicate effectively to the public and others in authority the issues related with climate science denial and the few academics and scientists who choose the other team.

Obviously there is, but as I tried to say before, there are probably a million different ways you could go about calculating a «global temperature» and some climate scientists (with possible financial encouragement from ExxonMobil or others intent on creating uncertainly as a stalling tactic) have apparently found a few of those million ways that don't happen to show much increase in temperature.

While many are renowned scientists (though very few from climate science) others are, for selected examples: Swedish Diplomat [and former weapons inspector], Nobel Prize winner in Literature, President of WWF International, Photographer and film producer, Mayor of Stockholm, EU parliamentarian, Professor of Social Sciences,.....

Here are a few places to look for the other other side of the story: Real Climate, Climate Progress (2, 3), New Scientist, and RealClimate.

Climate Consensus and «Misinformation»: a Rejoinder to «Agnotology, Scientific Consensus, and the Teaching and Learning of Climate Change» decisively rejects suggestions by Cook and others that those who say few scientists explicitly support the supposedly near - unanimous climate consensus are misinforming and misleading the Climate Consensus and «Misinformation»: a Rejoinder to «Agnotology, Scientific Consensus, and the Teaching and Learning of Climate Change» decisively rejects suggestions by Cook and others that those who say few scientists explicitly support the supposedly near - unanimous climate consensus are misinforming and misleading the Climate Change» decisively rejects suggestions by Cook and others that those who say few scientists explicitly support the supposedly near - unanimous climate consensus are misinforming and misleading the climate consensus are misinforming and misleading the public.

Can you list a few high profile climate scientists that do a really good job, aren't dictated by the IPCC dogma (even if authors), and can be a role model for others?

As a Fellow of the Geological Society of America (GSA), I periodically blog on their open forum and on their Climate Community website and among other things, I have been accused of «being on the payroll of the Koch brothers,» and when posting a link to Svensmark's video on clouds accused of doing science by u-tube,» and a few other choice things from so - called respected «scientists.»

The idea of there being scientists on the one hand, opposed by irrational sceptics on the other has been established so concretely that few editors, peer - reviewers or journalists even bother to ask questions about the content of the consensus, much less about how it is contradicted by the substance of climate sceptics» arguments.

Dr. Robert T. Watson, the chairman of the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, said he had received a flurry of phone calls from other scientists in the last few days expressing worries that Dr. Hansen's study could be misportrayed.

If we continue on our current emissions path, we're already headed for warming of up to 9 degrees Fahrenheit by 2100, which few climate scientists argue would be anything other than catastrophic, because of the drastic rise in sea levels, heat waves, species extinctions and shifts in rainfall that would result.

«The few authors who have such expertise are known to have extreme views that are out of step with nearly every other climate expert,» the letter from the scientists said.

Of course, Donald Rumsfeld was not specifically referring to climate science back in 2002, yet there can be few other disciplines so riven with uncertainties from top to bottom that are still able to attract voluble proponents enthusiastically promoting the latest findings as incontrovertible facts, to a world largely unable to question the work of scientists.

That literature — coupled with the astonishing number of off - the - charts extreme weather events of the past few years — is why more and more climate scientists and meteorologists and others are making the connection.

As the scientific world was rocked the past few days by the fraud and lies perpetrated by IPCC climate scientists, it should not be forgotten that lying, and other non-scientific methodologies, have been employed by various UN agencies to make ludicrous claims about human CO2 and climate change.

It sounds like you are saying that the IPCC is all out of date, most climate scientists are way behind the times, and that you and a few others know that global temperatures in the past rose (and therefore can) 7 degrees in a decade, proven in part with, among other things, 3 - 5 million year old tree rings uncovered from a peat bog in the Canadian Arctic.

While the window for global decisive action is rapidly closing, climate scientists should not make careless promises about their ability to reduce uncertainties in climate scenarios over the next few years, and thereby provide our governments with excuses to shun their responsabilities until they know more detail about how fast and adverse their regional impacts of global warming will be (compared to those in other countries).

In the next few days, the jury who will decide the fate of one of the UK's most prominent climate scientists will take their places... There are three clear charges: that Prof Jones and others tried to subvert the scientific peer - review process; that he attempted to conceal data that others requested; and that some data were manipulated.