It's
known by climatologists as the «Little Ice Age», a period in the 1600s when harsh winters across the UK and Europe were often severe.
From BBC's Paul Hudson It's
known by climatologists as the «Little Ice Age», a period in the 1600s when harsh winters across the UK and Europe were often severe.
Not exact matches
Climatologists have suggested that the winds,
known as the Greenland tip jet, could be a key force in driving the world's climate and the global ocean circulation
by pushing cold, dense water to the ocean floor and triggering the thermohaline circulation.
I am not a Glaciologist but a
Climatologist and the statement attributed to me in «Glacier scientist: I
knew data hadn't been verified»
By David Rose in UK Daily Mail on 24th January 2010 has been wrongly placed.
Instead, like Harold Pierce, Jr. (# 93), I want to
know what the
climatologists really think, unconstrained
by the formalities of a journal article.
Wouldn't
climatologists be scrambling to claim special expertise regarding clathrates, such that they could access funding which would «
no doubt» result from the alarm generated
by their potential impact?
In April 2005, the paper ran a 169 - word story highlighting a Science authored
by well -
known climatologist Jim Hansen, director of NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies.
The op - ed last Friday first garnered attention because it was signed
by 16 scientists, however other journalists have shown that most of these signatories are not
climatologists (the list includes an astronaut, a physician, and an airplane engineer), many are well -
known deniers, and at least six have been tied to the fossil fuels industry.
Meteorologists, physicists, geologists, observational
climatologists, etc.
know the scientific method when they see it and are appalled when it is violated
by warming researchers adjusting the facts to fit their conclusions.
The Niskanen Center, which calls itself a libertarian think tank, has a Center for Climate Science directed
by Dr. Joseph Majkut, a
climatologist who previously served on the staff of Brulle's ally Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse.52 The think tank R Street is so well
known for its friendliness to a carbon tax that when we published a study critical of the carbon tax, we invited it to contribute a defense of the tax.53 And as the present study goes to press, prominent Republicans at the Hoover Institution like George Schultz and James Baker are advocating vigorously for a carbon tax.54
Why don't you continue to represent those fine coal industry geologists
by pointing out a few that «
know much, much more about the mechanisms of the atmosphere and its variations over time...» than the
climatologists and atmospheric scientists that make it their profession to
know how atmospheres vary over time.
This is why we get all these conspiracy theories
by what appears to be liberal arts students and
climatologists who don't
know much about electrical engineering.
So although the number of northerly stations was cut in the 80s / 90s, it doesn't introduce a warm bias, because of the way the averaging of stations is done
by the
climatologists who do actually
know about these things.
30 years has the standard used
by climatologists since long before anyone thought of global warming, though I don't
know the justification for it.
Well; if a statement regarding atmospheric cooling is taking place, and we
know from past experience (climate history) that if this cooling continues and the build up of ice continues in Antartica like it is; then it is possible that the planet may very well be headed back into an ice age - and when this «atmospheric cooling» trend is mentioned on the GISS [NASA] Webpage, and
by one of the GISS scientists (Kate Marvel, a
climatologist at GISS and the paper's lead author) then i would have to conclude that the are embracing the science revealing evidence that such mechanics are, taking place, and I view their statemnt as an endorsement and ot their recognition, of global cooling.
I remember when Jones wrote that he didn't
know what he meant
by it, my reaction was to say BS, every
climatologist knows.
A recent interview I had with internationally
known geophysicist /
climatologist Dr. Jonathan Overpeck, from the University of Arizona speaks louder than anything I could possibly say about the lack of integrity of scientific data presented
by the global warming theorists.
«The brilliant and courageous
climatologist Michael Mann
knows what it's like to be viciously attacked
by the well - funded deniers of scientific evidence and how critical it is to respond.
It was also pointed out,
by climatologist Hubert Lamb among others, that the uncertainties included a failure to explain previous temperture fluctuations,
known from historical data, over the previous centuries.