Sentences with phrase «many scary predictions»

Any carbon dioxide emissions that may contribute to global warming — and recent climate modelling puts earlier scary predictions into question — have plateaued.

You might recall the scary predictions from the realty industry and some independent economists that began last fall: Cutting tax benefits for homeowners would...

Chu claims he knows «what the future will be 100 years from now» — «Shouldn't Chu be touting these scary predictions of the year 2100 on a boardwalk with a full deck of Tarot Cards?»

It's also a cautionary tale regarding charter - school authorizing, particularly when done on a large scale, and will inevitably be used by school - choice foes in the U.S. as evidence in support of their scary predictions that chartering will lead to «witchcraft schools» and such.

But no, they had to make scary predictions.

However, it is not good news for folks like Trenberth that rely upon increasingly scary predictions to separate taxpayers from their hard earned money.

The modellers» own explicit criterion proves their scary predictions exaggerated.

The global warming bandwagon would never have formed if scientists had had the balls to say to the politicians «Sure I can give you scary predictions about the world warming so much that civilisation is destroyed, but if I did that I would no longer be a scientist».

The IPCC scary predictions about harm to coral from CO2 are unfounded.

Can I urge you to read Kesten Green's structured analysis of (I paraphrase) Big Scary Predictions That Have Yet To Come True?

I suggest that our track record to date is infinitely superior to that of the global warming alarmists including the IPCC, who have been wrong in all their very - scary predictions.

«You can save yourselves a lot of time, and generally be correct, by simply assuming that EVERY SCARY PREDICTION the global warming alarmists express is FALSE.»

in re: The model study in Nature Climate change: The rhetoric from these failed climate scientists is always the same: «We're wrong, but we» rel important and you have to take us and our scary predictions seriously.»

Keep in mind that almost all the scary predictions by global warming alarmists have failed when scrutinized by experts.

Like pretty much every paper ever published by the climate alarmism industry, all the scary predictions are merely projections based on modeled scenarios dependent on so many dubious assumptions that their conclusions are objectively worthless.

In order to be able to make scary predictions (sorry scenarios)-- while not be held to their predictions (err sorry scenarios).

Not exact matches

So, unless I misunderstand Stetzer's argument, his predictions aren't scary at all.

Maybe it's better to see the picture as a scary - prescient prediction of what would happen if someone like Ernest were not only tasked with choosing the next President of the United States, but moreover tabbed as the vice-presidential nominee of a major candidate.

Investors have at least some natural tendency to react the same way to modern financial danger signals such as news or predictions of interest rate increases, market downturns, strikes, layoffs, scary political news and so on.

This way your not making a prediction to your puppy that «OK» actually means, «this is a scary situation and you better watch out!»

Maybe not enough (to some, nothing realistic will never be enough) but next time you see a scary set of extreme predictions remember that the worst ones are predicated on a future that we have already steered away from (and which were hardly likely in the first place).

We won't ever by able to effectively change anything with scary doomsday predictions, politically driven actions or half baked solutions... If we could just for a moment pull all of our hands out of proverbial the cookie jar stop with the politics and the anti-industry, global warming and end - of - the - world speak, and realize that our need is to focus on the things we ourselves can do to change our own shade of green, we would be taking one small step in the right direction.

If you were a nerdy scientist and could a great salary for playing computer games in an air - conditioned office, get in the media by making a scary climate prediction, and possibly become famous — maybe even getting to fly to an overseas global warming conference in Al Gore's private jet, and while doing all of this you can tell everyone you are working» hard» (9 am to 5 pm heh heh) «to save the Earth»....

So, are these scary model predictions reliable, and should we be worried?

And I note that your «scary» stories are entirely based on unverified predictions.

I think it's a case of taking a wild hypothesis, building a highly speculative model from it, generating some scary and dramatic predictions for the media, with the * specific * aim of raising public alarm and getting some political action.

They are certainly the only factors that climate activists and alarmists want to talk about, and use to generate scary «scenarios» that are presented as actual predictions of future calamities — while they attempt to silence debate, criticism and skepticism.

At the moment, the IPCC «consensus» doesn't include the scary catastrophic predictions that happen.

The tripling is not to get to the scary scenarios, but just to get to the mean model prediction and what comes out of the observational studies, both instrumental and paleo.

As someone who follows climate change news fairly closely, something that's been simultaneously frustrating and scary is how many people seem to believe that scientists are exaggerating the effects of climate change as a scare tactic, when in fact, if you compare their predictions with the actual observational evidence, scientists have overwhelmingly UNDERestimated the speed and violence of climate impacts.

While winemakers can use predictions to get ready for the season by foregoing early irrigation, using smaller plants, and change sprinkler frequency, it can be scary because farming is part luck.