Sentences with phrase «of anthropogenic global warming theory»

One of the biggest selling points of the anthropogenic global warming theory is the incorrect assertion that glaciers are melting, which will supposedly contribute to catastrophic rises in sea level and the endangerment of polar bears, among other things — and the media are all too eager to pass on this inaccurate view of climate to the public.

All the changes made by the IPCC and proponents of the anthropogenic global warming theory (AGW) were not done to adjust to new evidence or correct previous errors.

The distinct lack of any warming has compromised greatly the ability of climate models to accurately predict short and long - term climate trends, and in my opinion goes a long way toward the «critical failure» that falsifies the very hypothesis and foundation of the anthropogenic global warming theory.

It is a fundamental tenet of anthropogenic global warming theory that all the warmth at a planetary surface above that predicted by the S - B equation is due to those GHGs rather than atmospheric mass.

Not exact matches

For Republicans, the more knowledge they have about climate science the less likely they are to accept the theory of anthropogenic global warming (whereas Democrats» confidence goes up).

This is an attitude that some sincere climate change «skeptics» (as opposed to ExxonMobil - funded deliberate frauds) exhibit: their so - called «skepticism» arises from an a priori sense that human activities can not possibly affect the Earth system in the way that the theory of anthropogenic global warming describes.

These analyses, whilst not disproving the anthropogenic global warming theory, do show that the climate we are in today is not unusual in recent history, and therefore the possibility of natural variability causing the warming can not be ruled out, as it seemingly has been by many «independent» scientists, and the IPCC.

Ironically, some of the most damning evidence again the AGW or Anthropogenic Global Warming Theory comes from Al Gore himself.

Leaps of faith are perhaps acceptable in some theory of risk taking, but not when the huge global consequences for remediation of elusive «anthropogenic global warming» are pitted against them.

This is an attitude that some sincere climate change «skeptics» (as opposed to ExxonMobil - funded deliberate frauds) exhibit: their so - called «skepticism» arises from an a priori sense that human activities can not possibly affect the Earth system in the way that the theory of anthropogenic global warming describes.

Night gaunt, # 66 «I don't believe in Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW) anymore than I believe in the theory of Evolution.

Indeed, they, and the Bureau of Meteorology are remodelling temperature series so that they fit the theory of anthropogenic global warming.

Re # 8 (and to expand on # 13): I also think that a basic strategy of the global warming deniers is to focus on one aspect of the science over which there is some combination of real and manufactured dispute and then try to make people think that this is the one crucial piece of evidence on which the whole theory of anthropogenic warming rests... and thus that the dispute over this aspect throws the whole theory into question.

There is nothing «skeptical» about rejecting the overwhelming scientific evidence of ongoing, dangerous anthropogenic global warming while perpetrating and promoting falsehoods, distortions, sophistry and conspiracy theories, which is what WUWT is all about.

The theory of Anthropogenic Global Warming, in particular, is based on radiation physics.

CAGW or Catastrophic Anthropogenic Global Warming is the acronym used (mostly by those that don't support taking immediate action on climate change) for the theory (or collection of hypotheses) that attribute most of the observed modern warming to human activities and warn that continuing similar activities (mostly emitting CO2) could result in warming that is dangerous to both civilization and a number of ecosWarming is the acronym used (mostly by those that don't support taking immediate action on climate change) for the theory (or collection of hypotheses) that attribute most of the observed modern warming to human activities and warn that continuing similar activities (mostly emitting CO2) could result in warming that is dangerous to both civilization and a number of ecoswarming to human activities and warn that continuing similar activities (mostly emitting CO2) could result in warming that is dangerous to both civilization and a number of ecoswarming that is dangerous to both civilization and a number of ecosystems.

I don't believe in Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW) anymore than I believe in the theory of Evolution.

both of these well - researched observations would seem to put a big chink in the anthropogenic global warming theory — certainly as it applies to melting of the arctic ice cap.

I have no idea what you are referring to, except perhaps that the rote regurgitation of long - since and many - times - over debunked denialist nonsense is mercifully (and no doubt laboriously) deleted by the RC moderators — unlike every other open blog on the Internet where any attempt to discuss the science of anthropogenic global warming is quickly drowned out by a torrent of pseudoscience, conspiracy theories, blatant falsehoods, and hate speech against climate scientists.

The theory of anthropogenic global warming rests solely on computer - model projections into the future.

I'll also point out that the fundamental piece in the theory of anthropogenic global warming is simply the theory of the greenhouse effect (GHE).

1) If the anthropogenic global warming theory was entirely dependent on CO2 emissions and 2) if you only read the title of Singer's press release, your statement that he's misrepresenting the studies findings would be true.

Rapid spread and lack of understanding of the anthropogenic global warming (AGW) theory occurred because it quickly became part of school curricula.

You don't have to doubt the catastrophic anthropogenic global warming theory to know that there are key variables that have important, measurable effects on world temperatures at these kind of timescales — ocean cycles come to mind immediately — which he has left out.

«Seeing this list people might be fooled into thinking these papers somehow rebut the theory of Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW).»

The devotees of both sides of the mainstream climate debate i.e. on the one hand those who warn against the dangers of global warming, which they attribute mainly to atmospheric emissions of carbon dioxide, and on the other those who assert that the theory of anthropogenic global warming is a fraud, resort to hysteria when they sense that their ideas are under threat.

Those who support the theory of anthropogenic global warming (AGW), now known as anthropogenic climate change so that recent cooling can be included in their scenario, always deny that the sun has anything to do with recent global temperature movements.

Under the Theory of Anthropogenic Global Warming, it is human - generated greenhouse gases, and mainly CO 2, that cause climate change.

Joel, please don't take offense, but I do not think that your theory would work with either the theory of anthropogenic global warming (AGW) or with heat transfer engineering.

A question remains, then: am I to renounce my skepticism regarding anthropogenic global warming for the sake of the purity of your theory?

It is not credible to suggest the reports were biased in favour of the theory of anthropogenic global warming when the evidence demonstrates the IPCC were, in fact, so cautious.

MOST scientists sceptical of the theory of anthropogenic global warming (AGW) accepted that carbon dioxide is a greenhouse gas; they simply don't believe it is very potent relative to other natural forces.

These analyses, whilst not disproving the anthropogenic global warming theory, do show that the climate we are in today is not unusual in recent history, and therefore the possibility of natural variability causing the warming can not be ruled out, as it seemingly has been by many «independent» scientists, and the IPCC.

Leaps of faith are perhaps acceptable in some theory of risk taking, but not when the huge global consequences for remediation of elusive «anthropogenic global warming» are pitted against them.

Traditional anthropogenic theory of currently observed global warming states that release of carbon dioxide into atmosphere (partially as a result of utilization of fossil fuels) leads to an increase in atmospheric temperature because the molecules of CO2 (and other greenhouse gases) absorb the infrared radiation from the Earth's surface.

In the Comment by Nuccitelli et al., they make many false and invalid criticisms of the CFC - warming theory in my recent paper, and claim that their anthropogenic forcings including CO2 would provide a better explanation of the observed global mean surface temperature (GMST) data over the past 50 years.

Answer: Is this supposed to mean the theory of anthropogenic global warming must be wrong?

«Central to the theory of Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW) is the assumption that the Earth and every one of its subsystems behaviors as if they were blackbodies, that is their «emissivity» potential is calculated as 1.0.

Vis.: [Coby]: «In the case of the theory of Anthropogenic Global Warming, what we do have is a theory (first conceived over 100 years ago) that is based on well established laws of physics...».

In the case of anthropogenic global warming, there is a theory (first conceived over 100 years ago) based on well - established laws of physics.

In early 2008, the Oregon Institute of Science and Medicine (OISM) published their Petition Project, a list of names from people who all claimed to be scientists and who rejected the science behind the theory of anthropogenic (human - caused) global warming (AGW).

What is the point of providing a quote pertaining to an untested hypothesis when what is clearly being asked for is the replicable experiments which demonstrate that «Anthropogenic Global Warming» is indeed a theory (and not a falsified hypothesis)?

Whatever is happening in the great outdoors regarding actual climate epidemics, inside the minds of men overwhelming evidence indicates that Catastrophic Anthropogenic Global Warming the Germ Theory of Disease is a self - sustaining narrative that is living off our mental capacity, either in symbiosis or as an outright cultural parasite; a narrative that is very distanced from physical real - world events.

In pondering how we rationalize the «hiatus» in context of theories and predictions of anthropogenic global warming, I have been looking to the fields of philosophy of science and psychology for insights.

Further, there is a lot of money being made by media entities that promote rightwing rhetoric attacking theories of global warming and / or whether it is anthropogenic.

In Chapter 3, we will cover a bit of background on Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW) theory.

There is no doubt S. Fred Singer's estimate of sceptical scientists about the anthropogenic global warming theory are growing as the evidence of contradicts the theory.

The theory of anthropogenic global warming (AGW) is also not a problem for most sceptics.

The purpose of this paper is to provide a layman's critique of the Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW) theory, and in particular to challenge the fairly widespread notion that the science and projected consequences of AGW currently justify massive spending and government intervention into the world's economies.

In a number of past posts over at Coyote Blog, I have noticed the phenomenon of published studies whose data does nothing to bolster the theory of anthropogenic global warming adding in a line or two in the article saying that «of course the author's support anthorpogenic global warming theory» in the same way movies routinely assure audiences that «no animals were hurt in the filiming of this movie.»