Sentences with phrase «global warming skeptics like»

Gore calls on his climate faithful to treat global warming skeptics like racists and homophobes

Gore calls on his climate faithful to treat global warming skeptics like racists and homophobes By Ben Geman Former vice president Al Gore on Monday called for making climate change «denial» a taboo in society.

Not exact matches

Hundreds of global warming skeptics are in Washington to hear attacks on mainstream climate science and responses to it, like renewable energy programs and federal initiatives to reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

Like others in the incoming administration, Mulvaney is also a skeptic on climate, referring to «baseless claims regarding global warming» on his 2010 election campaign website (archived here).

The meeting coincides with a gathering of climate change skeptics in New York City, who are debating topics like «Global warming: Was it ever a crisis?»

Define democracy however you like; I find your refusal to acknowledge the harm done by the fundamental dishonesty of the global warming skeptics to be not only puzzling, but deeply troubling.

In fact, I was by default not doubting the global warming classic interpretation till I started reading multiple sources on the net, and as my self - confession as a recent skeptic shows, the argument from the denialist camp are not only convincing to petrol gulping rednecks, but also to a very scientifically minded, atheist european (although, I must admit, I like motor sports; — RRB --RRB-.

Long - time greens are painfully aware that the arguments of global warming skeptics are like zombies in a»70s B movie.

Wordy as the letter is, it could be boiled down much like Al Gore's 2006 movie or the collective lot of the entire catastrophic man - caused global warming into a 3 - part talking point: «the science is settled» / skeptics are industry - funded & orchestrated liars» / «reporters may ignore skeptics because of the prior two reasons.»

I find concerned liberals are loath to talk about how consistently wrong climate models have been or about the «pause» in global warming that has gone on for over fifteen years, while climate skeptics avoid discussion of things like ocean acidification and accelerated melting in Greenland and the Arctic.

There are of course ozone «skeptic» scientists just like there are global warming «skeptic» scientists, but the consensus and evidence are not in their favor.

The reason progressives constantly obscure the meaning of terms like skeptic, «global warming,» «AGW» (when you mean CAGW), is so you can convert your political opinions into «science,» and then falsely label your political opponents as anti-science.

There's no significant change in the understanding of climate change or global warming which continue to be valid expressions (while CAGW is just a concept invented by skeptics to use as they like and in a way that does not reflect main stream views).

That doesn't seem like it will solve this mainly because the «skeptics» left now are too self - invested and self - identifying with their view to be swayed by anything including a resumption of global warming and continued melting.

Former Virginia state climatologist and global warming skeptic Pat Michaels («Hurricane Pat,» as we once fondly dubbed him) pops up in an email as someone that a scientist from the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in California would like to attack --- and not just in the latest issue of a peer - reviewed journal.

Declarations that skeptic climate scientists knowingly lie about the certainty of man - caused global warming as paid shills of the fossil fuel industry appear devastating...... but dig deep into the details, and all those claims look more like a «Keystone Kops - style» farce.

A favorite argument among climate scientist «skeptics» like Christy, Spencer, and Lindzen is that «internal variability» can account for much or all of the global warming we've observed over the past century.

If 2014 really is the warmest year on record, then it's certainly wrong to say that global warming «stopped» back in 1998 — a favorite line of climate skeptics like Sen. James Inhofe (R - OK).

Like you I am a global warming skeptic and am so glad to finally have someone as President who thinks the way I do but globally the people have been brainwashed into thinking that Global Warming is the biggest threat to humanity there has everglobal warming skeptic and am so glad to finally have someone as President who thinks the way I do but globally the people have been brainwashed into thinking that Global Warming is the biggest threat to humanity there has evewarming skeptic and am so glad to finally have someone as President who thinks the way I do but globally the people have been brainwashed into thinking that Global Warming is the biggest threat to humanity there has everGlobal Warming is the biggest threat to humanity there has eveWarming is the biggest threat to humanity there has ever been.

Those who don't want to be seen to be swivel - eyed lunatics associate with Nigel Lawson's Global Warming Policy Foundation and critics like Roger Pielke Jr. (which is why Pielke hated being named by Foreign Policy as a top «skeptic»).

It seems like IGES's effort to get Obama to prosecute global warming skeptics has completely backfired in the two weeks since their letter to the administration was published online.

Personal attacks on «skeptics» like me began as evidence failed to support the claim that human CO2 was causing global warming and we persisted in saying so.

AGW skeptics are Holocaust deniers, children will never know what snow is, rivers will run red and «oceans will begin to boil, Earth will be like Venus, global warming is not a Left vs. right issue and, unlike our ancestors, we will be led to survival by high priests in green robes with computer models chanting anti-energy and anti-food slogans....

«And then you add in the media, with people like Leonardo DiCaprio and Laurie David telling kids if you're a global warming skeptic, you are not cool.

«And then you add in the media, with people like Leonardo DiCaprio and Laurie David telling kids if you're a global warming skeptic, you are not cool,» said Morano.

Watch the global warming issue zooming by in a superficial manner and all the horrific claims — increasingly extreme weather events, imperiled polar bear populations, skeptics who are paid to lie about the truth of all of this — sound like they are true.

Steven Goddard has amassed massive amounts of graphs and data evidence of fraud with GISS, NOAA, BOM ect., No one actually cares or is even looking at this study, Hopefully it is because no one cares about global warming anymore except a few warmist fanatics and skeptics etc... Only serious legal action funded by a wealthy skeptic or the like will actually make anyone notice that is the sad fact I'm afraid.

Climate change skeptics like James Taylor, environmental policy fellow at the Heartland Institute, a conservative think tank, said the pushback in schools and legislatures reflected public frustration at being told «only one side of the global warming debate — the scientifically controversial theory that humans are creating a global warming crisis.»

I'm sure they'd love to run around arresting skeptics, AKA those of us who «pollute» the idea of anthropogenic global warming and don't like the Federal Government's continuous power grab and carbon tax attempts.

Then certainly, you have expressed concerns about global - warming «skeptic» papers like McLean / de Freitas / Carter 2009, Soon / Baliunas 2003, etc., etc. that were published in spite of the fact that they contained errors that an undergraduate would be dinged for at any respected university...

There shouldn't be much doubt that global warming skeptics and deniers will latch onto the Pachauri story like they did with the hacked emails from IPCC scientists.

You're beside yourself seeing the church of carbon sin come falling down like a house of cards from the pause and now you're seeing both your warmist heroes and skeptic enemies who are top shelf climate scientists agree that heat diffused into the deep ocean isn't «heat in the pipeline» that will reemerge as rapid global warming.

The global - warming crowd likes to deride skeptics as the equivalent of the Catholic Church refusing to accept the Copernican theory.

So, imply the «reposition global warming» phrase is proof of skeptic climate scientists» guilt while failing to explain precisely how, and it only ends up looking like slick propaganda no matter which way you try to push it.

The surprise to me with this lawsuit is that it doesn't feature sensational evidence like others did — the older Kivalina v Exxon case and the newer San Mateo / Marin / Imperial Beach v. Chevron cases — by citing the infamous «leaked memo set» headlined with «reposition global warming as theory rather than fact,» which are universally accepted among enviro - activists as smoking gun evidence of skeptic climate scientists being paid to push misinformation to the public at the behest of sinister corporate handlers.