Their (your, Judith Curry) scientific incompetence is just as
large as the alarmists».
Not exact matches
By the way, if you guys really believe that,
as an expert told you, «newspapers essentially never use op ed space for op eds directly rebutting other op eds,» then maybe it'd be better to offer to engage the denialists»
larger themes anyway: their junk science, their tarring of you all
as «
alarmists,» their idea that what's genuinely alarming is really only the concoction of a «science - journalism complex.»
«If the United Nations and fellow climate
alarmists get their way on restricting carbon dioxide, the poor will soon be getting poorer — much, much poorer — especially in places such
as Africa, Latin America, and
large swaths of Asia,» The New American's Alex Newman reported in a 2013 article entitled UN Carbon Regime Would Devastate Humanity,
As for the ubiquitous claim that the debate has been skewed by corporate funding — especially oil money — what tends to be forgotten are the much
larger sums available to the likes of Greenpeace and WWF to push their own exaggerated
alarmist line.
But
as this Holland dataset confirms, the actual empirical global and regional trends of a climatic shift of ever more severe weather events do not support the
alarmists» predictions; the irrational fears of more frequent /
larger weather disasters
as a result of CO2 or global / regional «warming» is unjustified, per the scientific evidence.
The media, in Australia
as elsewhere, has by and
large been lap - dogs for the
alarmists... and she actually believes that the skeptics are controlling the Aussie media?
In recent years they have been ruled by the Labor Party, which has changed their electric generating system perhaps
as much or more than any
large grid anywhere in the world to meet the demands of the climate
alarmists.