Sentences with phrase «modern climate scientists»

Rather, it contends that modern climate scientists are at best seriously misguided in their collective opinion on the nature and causes of global warming, or are at worst guilty of lying to the rest of the community.

I think the crowd at The Blackboard simply enjoy playing whack - a-mole with poor scienctific papers and public statements and see post modern climate scientists as so many giraffes parading at the windfarm.

If only modern climate scientists had their intellect, the problem would assuredly go away.

Not exact matches

As hundreds of firefighters and some two dozen air tankers battle Canada's massive wildfires, scientists and other experts say prolonged modern droughts and climate change are creating a new perfect storm of super fires and other extreme weather events.

The modern, domesticated chickpea has an extreme lack of genetic diversity, leaving it vulnerable to climate change, prompting scientists to seek out wild varieties for crossbreeding programmes.

A new study by an international team of scientists reveals the exact timing of the onset of the modern monsoon pattern in the Maldives 12.9 million years ago, and its connection to past climate changes and coral reefs in the region.

For example, Senegal has «switched virtually its entire population from traditional stoves to modern ones, so it can be done,» climate scientist Drew Shindell of NASA's Goddard Institute for Space Studies, lead author of the study, wrote in an e-mail.

«As we consider how humans may be affecting climate, dissecting what was going on tens of thousands of years ago in all regions of the globe can help scientists better predict how the Earth will respond to modern climate forcings.»

The hockey stick - shape temperature plot that shows modern climate considerably warmer than past climate has been verified by many scientists using different methodologies (PCA, CPS, EIV, isotopic analysis, & direct T measurements).

While the Scarisoara ice core has given scientists a window into the Holocene past, its applications for the future have been limited by a very modern problem: climate change.

Climate scientists find it useful to use analogs to put modern day change into historical perspective.

By comparing the bones of modern whales to fossils, a team of scientists has traced the growth spurt to about 4.5 million years ago, when climate change increased the food supply.

I'm struggling with your first paragraph where you talk of Montford claiming «all of modern climate science, is a fraud perpetrated by a massive conspiracy of climate scientists and politicians, in order to guarantee an unending supply of research funding and political power.

If you don't know much about climate science, or about the details of the controversy over the «hockey stick,» then A. W. Montford's book The Hockey Stick Illusion: Climategate and the Corruption of Science might persuade you that not only the hockey stick, but all of modern climate science, is a fraud perpetrated by a massive conspiracy of climate scientists and politicians, in order to guarantee an unending supply of research funding and political power.

As scientists looked for ways to get around the problem, critics of modern climate science dismissed the tree ring data as unreliable and accused scientists of cooking up tricks to support the theory of global warming.

[1] Henceforth skeptics are excused from ever naming all the great scientists they claim support their position, but who must operate in total secrecy to protect themselves from persecution by the climate science establishment that is the modern equivalent of the Spanish Inquisition.

Here's the deal: no credible scientists doubt that modern climate change is largely anthropogenic.

While many climate scientists have come under the withering fire of skeptics, some of the toughest fights have centered around Mann and his research — largely because of a single study that demonstrated that modern climate change is unprecedented in at least the past millenium of Earth's history.

Modern scientists follow the evidence - based scientific method that Galileo pioneered; climate «skeptics» who oppose scientific findings that threaten their world view are far closer to Galileo's belief - based critics in the Catholic Church.

Scientists have been studying the event because it is seen as an analog, albeit an imperfect one, of modern climate change.

A modern climate model is a remarkable tool, and definitely the best method scientists have for investigating climate change.

It seems to me that science, particularly climate science, has some very serious issues that high light a narcissistic self importance in that a lot of modern scientists, particularly in climate science, now seem to believe they have a role in and a god given right to try and ensure the implementation of their own personally believed ideologies.

As we have seen, there are bad climate scientists who rig the computer models representing a huge rise in the Earth's overall average temperature and there are good climate scientists who have waged a long and increasingly successful effort to debunk the greatest hoax of the modern era.

One of the most obvious indicators that Earth's climate changes was discovered not by any modern scientist, but by the forefathers of science who first looked to the stars - Kepler, Copernicus and Newton - and realized that Earth's position in space is not fixed.

I researched many climate scientists (ancient and modern) who saw a very clear link between CEt and global temperature.

NO climate «scientist» can explain these earlier massive changes, nor can they explain today's modern warming period.

Professor Hughes's many papers reporting his results, including those on climate change, were reviewed by independent — and often anonymous — panels of scientists before publication, in the peer - review system that drives modern science.

At a September 27, 2014 panel discussion at Queens Museum titled «Climate Wars: Propaganda, Debate, and the Propaganda of Debate,» Hoggan revealed that he was inspired to start DeSmogBlog by the work of Ross Gelbspan, a retired journalist who helped launch the modern environmental movement and spread the slanderous narrative of Al Gore's Earth in the Balance (page 160) that skeptical scientists are paid shills of fossil fuel companies hired to neutralize public support for government climate prClimate Wars: Propaganda, Debate, and the Propaganda of Debate,» Hoggan revealed that he was inspired to start DeSmogBlog by the work of Ross Gelbspan, a retired journalist who helped launch the modern environmental movement and spread the slanderous narrative of Al Gore's Earth in the Balance (page 160) that skeptical scientists are paid shills of fossil fuel companies hired to neutralize public support for government climate prclimate programs.

«scientists have assumed» «The climate models assume» «assumption that Natural CO2 is totally fixed and unchanging» «if you assume a long lifetime for atmospheric CO2 ″ «falsification of the basic assumption» «it requires assumptions that violate empirical knowledge» «assumed so that the ice cores and modern measurements fit together» «arbitrary and unjustified assumption»

The modern glorification of specialization allowed climate scientists to dominate by claiming their piece of a vast puzzle was critical.

The modern equivalent with regard to AGW is that, despite the claim that 95 % or more of climate scientists support the AGW establishment position, support for the position among the general public (of the western nations anyway) is only of the order of 50 %.

Second, it has been well established by multiple analysts that modern climate records have been heavily manipulated by govt «scientists» to fabricate faux - warming over vast regions of the globe.

That the climate model need not work is perfectly acceptable to the Post Modern (Climate) Scientists because their model of science has no Cause & Effect, so it has no way to predict, and can have no standard that the modelclimate model need not work is perfectly acceptable to the Post Modern (Climate) Scientists because their model of science has no Cause & Effect, so it has no way to predict, and can have no standard that the modelClimate) Scientists because their model of science has no Cause & Effect, so it has no way to predict, and can have no standard that the models work.

Climate «scientists» pushing the human - induced global warming hysteria have predicted that modern global warming will soon change the ENSO climate pattern and all that will remain will be a permanent EClimate «scientists» pushing the human - induced global warming hysteria have predicted that modern global warming will soon change the ENSO climate pattern and all that will remain will be a permanent Eclimate pattern and all that will remain will be a permanent El Niño.

To understand this just think in post normal science and «modern» specialization: How in the world a «climate scientist» or an «ecologist» watching 8 hours a day at a computer screen can know about nature.

One does not have to be a climate «rocket» scientist to recognize that the earlier 20th century warming increase was greater than the modern warming.

Again, obviously, the modern U.S. climate change has been way over-hyped by politicians and government scientists when put into a historical perspective, as above.

Now compound this massive propaganda failure by the anti-growth Democrats with this week's latest climate science news from the world's premier science journal and a leading global warming alarmist scientist: natural ocean oscillations are responsible for Earth's modern temperature changes, not human CO2.

Fabricating fake temperatures is often used to describe the massive amount of adjustments (manipulations) made to temperature datasets, be they modern instrumental or paleo proxy reconstructions.The major climate agencies and climate scientists across the world have claimed that global warming is «unequivocal» yet they are conducting a constant revisionism of historical temperatures to produce faux warming, or if need be, false cooling when needed.

Above all, these supposed modeling experts and climate scientists need to terminate their biases and their evangelism of political agendas that seek to slash fossil fuel use, «transform» our energy and economic systems, reduce our standards of living, and «permit» African and other impoverished nations to enter the modern era only in a «sustainable manner,» as callous elitists often insist.

That's why Michael Mann was heralded as a climate change hero when he sacrificed his career as a respectable scientist to create a bogus historical temperature reconstruction which deleted all past climate variation of the last 2,000 years so that modern warming would appear as an UNPRECEDENTED!

The participants in the countermovement have attacked climate models, paleoclimatic data on which warming trends are based, modern temperature records, mainstream scientists who have claimed there is an urgent need to act, and manufactured bogus non-peer-reviewed climate science claims which they have then widely publicized in books and pamphlets, and then widely circulated the publications to journalists and politicians, tactics which have succeeded in getting the disinformation propaganda widely distributed by friendly media.

If you're operating Fortran on an Unix machine (as medievalists and climate scientists do), then it's not a problem; but if you're working in modern languages, it is a problem.

To non-climate scientists, North's admission that he hadn't read the Climategate Letters -LCB- out of «professional respect») would seem to disqualify him as an expert, but not, it seems, in the bizarro world of modern climate science.

Eminent climate scientists have come to consensus that human influences are significant contributors to modern global climate change.

nor their capacity to blind themselves to facts.; ideolog -LCB-- y, - ically, etc -RCB-; intellectually impoverished adherents of post modernism «science»,; IPCC; lying cheating warmist «scientist»; Lysenko; morally and ethically bankrupt; more skullduggery by the «Team»; orthodoxy; Phrenology ~ climate science; policy apparachiks; post modern; Propaganda; pseudo science; religion; religious -LCB-- ly - based -RCB-; sacred CAGW gospel; scam; «science» now means «propaganda» «idolatry», «blindness», «mendacity» and «venality»; scum; vindictive people; pitchforks and torches and tar....

The modern equivalent with regard to AGW is that, despite the claim that 95 % or more of climate scientists support the AGW establishment position, support for the position among the general public (of the western nations anyway) is only of the order of 50 % (14).

«Facts Don't Lie: Unexceptional Global Climate Warming In The U.S. Main Fiji: Scientists Establish The Relationship Between Modern CO2 Emissions & Severe Flooding»

So we have two competing climate history stories - one developed over a lifetime of academic research mostly before the computer era, and the other derived from a scientist using modern statistical techniques and the extensive use of novel proxies interpreted in a highly sophisticated manner using computers.

Sadly, the balance of 97 % agreement by climate scientists re Anthropogenic Global Warming and Climate Change versus the only 55 % of agreement by the public relects the reality of getting a message across using modernclimate scientists re Anthropogenic Global Warming and Climate Change versus the only 55 % of agreement by the public relects the reality of getting a message across using modernClimate Change versus the only 55 % of agreement by the public relects the reality of getting a message across using modern media.