Sentences with phrase «leading skeptics of»

The Oklahoma senator has earned a reputation as one of the country's leading skeptics of global warming, and has called the theory «a hoax.»

«Give me a break,» says Alan Feduccia, a biologist at nearby University of North Carolina in Chapel Hill and a leading skeptic of the bird - dinosaur connection.

Soon is a leading skeptic of the widely accepted science surrounding climate change, In the International Journal of Public Opinion Research, a study titled «The Structure of Scientific Opinion on Climate Change» found that 97 percent of scientists surveyed believed global warming already is ongoing, with 84 percent of scientists surveyed believing human - produced greenhouse gases were the driving force behind the change.

Patrick J. Michaels, a University of Virginia professor and state climatologist since 1980, has been a leading skeptic of global warming theories.

In a surprise, the Senate's leading skeptic of climate science, Sen. James Inhofe (R - Okla.)

Not exact matches

Skeptics voiced concern that the system's anonymity could lead to its use in the trade of illegal goods.

In 2012 the lines between the sacred and the profane will get even more blurry: Scientists will religiously maintain their search for the elusive God particle (they won't find it); evangelical sports superhero and Denver Bronco quarterback Tim Tebow will continue to be both an inspiration to the faithful and an object of scorn to skeptics (he will be watching, not playing in, the Super Bowl); at least one well - known religious leader or leading religious politician will be brought down by a sex scandal (let's hope all our leaders have learned a lesson from former Rep. Anthony Weiner and stay away from sexting); and the «nones» - those who don't identify with one religion - will grow even more numerous and find religious meanings in unexpected places (what TV show will become this season's «Lost»?)

The Trump administration plans to withdraw its nomination of Kathleen Hartnett White, a climate change skeptic, to lead the Council on Environmental Quality, a White House official said.

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.»

Doubting or rejecting the science on climate change no longer makes someone a «skeptic» or «denier» in the views of a leading news organization.

For a few minutes it looked like a détente had been reached between John Holdren, the president's science advisor, and Representative Dana Rohrabacher (R - CA), the leading climate skeptic on the House of Representatives science committee.

, a leading climate skeptic who opposes restrictions on carbon pollution, argued that the administration could harm the U.S. economy by enacting new regulations particularly given the skyrocketing emissions of China and India, Kerry was quick with a challenge.

The ongoing difficulty of accurately measuring the Earth's ocean heat content has led to premature «skeptic» claims about ocean cooling.

It's hard to imagine this tale of tradition and miracles leading skeptics to contemplation, much less faith.

The film also includes interviews with leading skeptics, as well as light - hearted animated sequences which follow Marx's adventures through the matrix of his own ideas.

Swank's skeptic is tempered with her more faithful partner, Ben, which leads to a certain friendly tension between the two in trying to explain what the root of all of these evils truly is.

Before the film was released, there were skeptics who didn't believe in the concept of casting females as the lead ghostbusters.

Evaluations led by Harvard's Tom Kane and MIT's Josh Angrist have used this lottery - based method to convince most skeptics that the impressive test - score performance of the Boston charter sector reflects real differences in school quality rather than the types of students charter schools serve.

It led champions of market - oriented reforms — and so also allowed skeptics — to adopt a ludicrous standard for judging whether school choice «works.»

They have led champions of market - oriented reforms — and so also allowed skeptics — to adopt a ludicrous standard for judging whether school choice «works.»

It became apparent to me soon thereafter, that I was merely a pawn in their media game, so that they could ultimately assert that: «The Times shared [what they did] with leading researchers, including skeptics of value added methods, and incorporated their input.»

But some skeptics question whether the basic lack of human interaction during an online class, regardless of the subject matter, can lead to problems down the road.

Would we have an equal population of «skeptics» if the science did not lead to the requirement for legislation?

Check out this chart showing the interconnections of the most often cited skeptics scientists and groups such as the Heartland Institute, whose mandate is to fight anything that might lead to regulation.

Calling skeptics «grasshoppers» does nothing to further the goal of increased understanding and better predictions leading to better policies.

Therefore, this argument by the skeptics is inaccurate and leads to the confusion of the general public (due to the disinformation done in the media today).

The fact that hurricane events are relatively rare leads to a limitation in the amount of data available — fewer events, and that's why the «skeptics» have to rely on statistical rather then mechanical arguments (notice also that the media seems to avoid any mention of the fact that hurricanes operate as «heat engines»).

Some leading lights in environmental science have been pushing their colleagues, and institutions like the National Academies, to come out swinging against the ongoing barrage of assaults from organized opponents of restrictions on greenhouse gases and climate skeptics / contrarians / denialists / realists (pick your label depending on your worldview).

Exaggeration only provides fodder to the dwindling community of climate skeptics and leads the audience to doubt the seriousness of climate change and the immediacy of the need for action.

Why don't you step up to the plate to correct some of the leading lights among «skeptics» (Willis, Brandon,, Matthew Marler) in their laughably unskeptical thinking where they have determined with complete certainty that Dan was using a «sockpuppet» to «con» and «fool» Willis, and then «confessed» that he did so just to screw with Willis» head?

Pretty funny how leading «skeptics» are completely inconsistent with your broad characterization of «skeptics,» isn't it?

I think many (by no means all) skeptics are motivated by an instinctive humanism and understanding of freedom which leads them to reject the scientised green consensus.

I've seen skeptics both on and off the blogs make some pretty ridiculous statements as well, but that doesn't lead me to believe anyone questioning the IPCC does so out of fear of a One World Government.

Neither Gelbspan nor anyone repeating his accusation ever proved the money trail led to an industry directive to lie about global warming science; none of them have proved skeptic climate scientists were instructed to mimic tobacco industry tactics; journalists have demonstrably not offered overall fair balance in to skeptic climate scientists; the «wedge» being driven is one arguably pounded by enviro - activists who push the «skeptics don't deserve fair media balance» talking point; and Gelbspan was not the first one to bring up this talking point.

And that reality has been demonstrated over and over again, most recently in the work of the Berkeley Earth Surface Temperature project, led by Dr. Richard Muller, who began his comprehensive assessment as an avowed climate skeptic and ended it convinced by the clear evidence that global warming is happening and is caused by human activity.This conclusion is emphatically shared by the best and brightest of the global scientific community, including our own National Academy of Sciences.

The accusation that skeptic scientists are paid to lie about the issue is not hard to follow at all, basic scrutiny of it reveals inconsistencies that only lead to more problems.

This led to the University of East Anglia turning over all the files related to skeptics and their requests through Freedom of Information (FOI).

Instead, ExxonMobil diverts corporate resources to support the work of some of the nation's leading skeptics on climate change, who claim that fears of global warming are overblown.

But look far more carefully into this, and the widening situation around it leads to a maddeningly tangled source situation that ultimately does nothing to alleviate the problem of the smear of skeptic climate scientists — including efforts to discredit the Oregon Petition — appearing to be intertwined with a small clique of enviro - activists who have barely any separation from Ross Gelbspan.

However, he completed the transformation from an environmental outlier advocating on behalf of free trade, deregulation, and the privatization of our natural resources, to an outright pariah due to the release of his 2008 book The Deniers, which established him as one of the world's leading climate change skeptics.

Then they tried to tie prominent skeptics with evil «fossil» industry funding, launching PR attacks on the scientific integrity of leading skeptics and closing down access to peer reviewed journals.

The truth is that «97 % of all skeptics»;) were led there by the science itself.

This week, that campaign took a serious body blow, as one of its leading pseudo-scientific voices was exposed as a liar and a fraud, having accepted millions of corporate dollars to pose as a climate - change skeptic.

This led to the University turning over all the files related to skeptics and their requests through Freedom of Information (FOI).

However, the lead author of the study Crichton cites in the footnote for this assertion stated in a New York Times interview (PDF File) that he objected to his study being used by greenhouse skeptics to portray the melting of Kilimanjaro's glaciers as a «black - and - white picture that says it is either global warming or not global warming».

«The language of denial: Text analysis reveals differences in language use between climate change proponents and skeptics» «Comment on «Climate Science and the Uncertainty Monster» by J. A. Curry and P. J. Webster» «Guidance note for lead authors of the IPCC Fifth Assessment Report on consistent treatment of uncertainties»

After an initial effort to discredit the book failed, Western Fuels, along with a leading industry - funded «greenhouse skeptic,» S. Fred Singer, accused Gelbspan of resume fraud.

The Problem is, that most of skeptic do not realise, that internal fluctuation will aways lead to «Pause» «cooling» «Hiatus» or some named else.

The Koch brothers are leading funders of climate change contrarians / deniers / faux skeptics (see documentation in the UU - UNO Climate Portal essay HERE).

But the accumulation of evidence led to a near - total scientific consensus, [3][4] making the word «skeptic» a misnomer and «a black eye on true skeptics».