In particular, she worries that climate models «involve a lot of theory and guesswork» about amplifying feedbacks that enhance the uncontested warming effect of CO2, which places her in the company
of lukewarmists.
Not exact matches
Then you are clearly an hands - on experienced expert in the behavior
of outrageous hand waving climate science deniers and
lukewarmists too!
These days any skeptic, or even «
lukewarmists» like Tom Fuller, knows that the discussions on RealClimate are not in good faith, that heterodox comments will be censored, deleted, ignored, distorted or ridiculed as a matter
of course and regardless
of merit.
Lord Monckton is a
lukewarmist and is ignorant
of the difference between heat and thermal energy.
As a «
lukewarmist» you should have your head examined to make sure the logic and reasoning side
of your brain is working!
The Journal
of the American Statistical Association still publishes good papers supporting a skeptical /
lukewarmist position (as does the AAAS's Science Magazine), but I expect that the board
of the ASA has just raised the bar for accepting studies not supportive
of the consensus.
Glancing at my postings, I see a hardening
of my position as a
lukewarmist in 2009 with Climategate sealing the deal.
The self - described «global
lukewarmist» is a non-executive director
of Tethys Petroleum.
Lukewarmists would no doubt be arguing about the numerical value
of the rigidity, claiming the viscosity was just really small, and that almost incompressible would do.