Sentences with phrase «of other climate blogs»

My criticism would be that it looks like a lot of other climate blogs now.

Or on most of the other climate blogs — on either side of the dance floor.

Not exact matches

Similar frustrations, he said, led him and a group of other climate experts to found the collective blog Realclimate.org several years ago, meant to bring timely and relevant climate information direct from scientists to the public.

It's hard to know just how far this view has seeped into mainstream climate scepticism, but the themes of corrupt science and cheating and lying climate scientists are widely disseminated on sceptic blogs and other outlets.

In summary, the problem seems to be that the circling of the wagons strategy developed by small groups of climate researchers in response to the politically motivated attacks against climate science are now being used against other climate researchers and the more technical blogs (e.g. Climateaudit, Lucia, etc).

A recent paper Internet Blogs, Polar Bears, and Climate - Change Denial by Proxy by JEFFREY A. HARVEY and 13 others has been creating somewhat of a stir in the blogosphere.

Yes, I know, not the best way to introduce how to wear satin but I thought I'd get that out of the way because some of you who read this blog live in tropical climates but for those of us who are now moving into Spring, it is nice, for a change, to wear satin elsewhere other than in bed (wink, wink).

«I'll say this t the public Mr Interviewer, anyone who believes that the information on blogs like Judith Curry's and appearances by Lord Monckton is based on the scientific facts as contained in the IPCC reports and thousands of other Papers prodcued by 27,000 people in the climate field are fooling themselves.

Watch the first 1 to 2 minutes section of the UP Stream Pt 4 doco / research prject specifically being directed at all Climate Scientists about how important Values are, and why Listening to the community (the target market) is absolutely critical: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iyRKTqsXfjM Watch how people (the general public) are treated by others (climate scientists included) on all climate blogs when they indicate they are not yet convinced of AGW or can't work out who to believe is telling the truth and in doing so reference someone else's «opinion»... and try and measure the level of paranoia exhibited by pro-agw folks about such negative comments about the sClimate Scientists about how important Values are, and why Listening to the community (the target market) is absolutely critical: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iyRKTqsXfjM Watch how people (the general public) are treated by others (climate scientists included) on all climate blogs when they indicate they are not yet convinced of AGW or can't work out who to believe is telling the truth and in doing so reference someone else's «opinion»... and try and measure the level of paranoia exhibited by pro-agw folks about such negative comments about the sclimate scientists included) on all climate blogs when they indicate they are not yet convinced of AGW or can't work out who to believe is telling the truth and in doing so reference someone else's «opinion»... and try and measure the level of paranoia exhibited by pro-agw folks about such negative comments about the sclimate blogs when they indicate they are not yet convinced of AGW or can't work out who to believe is telling the truth and in doing so reference someone else's «opinion»... and try and measure the level of paranoia exhibited by pro-agw folks about such negative comments about the science.

But there has also been an «appraisal» of the paper by Nic Lewis that has appeared in no fewer than three other climate blogs (you can guess which).

Gavin Schmidt, the NASA climatologist and indefatigable curator of the Realclimate.org blog (photographed above by Keith Myers of The New York Times), has weighed in on the year of attacks, defense and reappraisal that he and dozens of other climate researchers experienced following the unauthorized release of folders containing hundreds of their e-mail exchanges and files last November.

Maybe I'm ignorant of the absence in coverage relating to our climate issues because I voluntarily seek out all articles pertaining to these multiple subjects covered here in Andy's blog, among other's.

The article and particularly the comments on «The Register» and myriad other loci of discussion (for instance, NY Times climate blog) tell us that until we can improve our collective understanding of science as a concept we can expect to encounter a lot of friction in any attempt to make progress in public and industry policy responses to GW.

A previous study by the same researchers questioning other climate research was rather harshly criticized by Realclimate.org and Kevin Trenberth of the National Center for Atmospheric Research, writing in an online blog of the journal Nature.

The other would be to ramp up climate and space observations (instead of shredding budgets for relevant agencies), to boost the human capacity for resilience to climate extremes of all sorts, whatever the cause (a mantra on this blog), and to keep up a sustained energy quest to build a menu that works for the long haul — an imperative that is utterly sensible regardless of short - term ups and downs in temperature.

This shift away from CO2 - centric emissions debates is also evident in a group blog post by analysts at the Center for American Progress, who propose a «multiple multilateralism» approach on climate that, among other things, seeks quick steps on sources of warming other than carbon dioxide — particularly sooty Arctic pollution and gases already considered under the existing ozone - protection treaty.

Given the evidence that words may be relatively worthless in propelling change on energy and climate, other kinds of communication, from cartoons to folk songs to YouTube videos on geo - engineering, have as valid a place in the discourse as articles or, yes, blogs.

Daniel C. Goodwin (36)-- See Climate Progress, linked under the Other Opinions section of the sidebar, for critically negative commentary on that Nature article by the blog owner, Dr. Joseph Romm.

In relation to the above posts, and the drip drip drip effect of climate change, taking place so glacially - slow and yet very very real — and perhaps with huge ramifications for the future of humankind — I coined a new word the other day... and the inspiration for it came directly from this blog.

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.

I am aware that there is a hugely varied readership of my blog; those who are very well informed about weather and climate, and others that have an interest in the subject but would struggle with some of the details contained in scientific papers.

Hundreds of comments and E-mail exchanges took place in 2011 between Andrew, members of John O'Sullivan's group of climate science «slayers» / Principia Scientific International (PSI) members and other parties and many have been posted on the Global Political Shenanigans blog since May.

I'm very sceptical of CAGW and I read WUWT every day and follow some other blogs like Climate Audit and Climate Etc. pretty routinely and I never saw anything about this survey until the paper came out.

This blog — I don't know if you've read any of the other pages on it — is about climate politics.

I'm not sure if you have read it, and a quick perusal of other blogs finds no mention, so I thought I would bring it to your attention for the parallels to the development of the climate consensus.

Given the scale of repetition of arguments on this and other climate blogs I consider any such duplication for the general good not just defensible but a blessing.

There are other blogs where the pure science is debated, and others have their own perspective on the politics of climate change.

We respectfully ask all activists, bloggers, and other journalists to immediately remove all of these documents and any quotations taken from them, especially the fake «climate strategy» memo and any quotations from the same, from their blogs, Web sites, and publications, and to publish retractions.

Today I offer this post as a «Summary for Policymakers» regarding my series of seven prior blog posts about a smear effort which took place back in 2007 that is a case study for examining other prior and current industry corruption accusations against skeptic climate scientists.

«Climate Power Play by the AAAS...» has been a very interesting blog string; however, like some others, it degraded into a bantering between a small number of individuals, with volumes of hot air exchanged, often personal insults, and of zero interest to the well intended general followership.

A disconcerting feature of much commentary here and in other blogs is the relentless refrain claiming that the «climate system is chaotic.»

As a Fellow of the Geological Society of America (GSA), I periodically blog on their open forum and on their Climate Community website and among other things, I have been accused of «being on the payroll of the Koch brothers,» and when posting a link to Svensmark's video on clouds accused of doing science by u-tube,» and a few other choice things from so - called respected «scientists.»

This is perhaps the only explanation that fits the world view of some of the CAGW consensus advocates, that the popularity of blogs like Watts Up With That, Climate Audit, Bishop Hill, Jo Nova, The AirVent, Harmless Sky and many others, is because organisations are creating an environment that allows these blogs to flourish.

«One way or the other, Gleick's use of deception in pursuit of his cause after years of calling out climate deception has destroyed his credibility and harmed others,» wrote climate journalist Andy Revkin on his New York Times «Dot Earth» blog, adding, «The broader tragedy is that his decision to go to such extremes in his fight with Heartland has greatly set back any prospects of the country having the «rational public debate» that he wrote — correctly — is so desperately needed.»

For this reason, among others, this is by far the most credible blog on the subject of climate climate.

A recent study involving visitors to climate blogs found that conspiracist ideation was associated with the rejection of climate science and the rejection of other scientific propositions such as the link between lung cancer and smoking, and between HIV and AIDS (Lewandowsky, Oberauer, & Gignac, in press; LOG12 from here on).

While there are obvious prominent owners of right - leaning media, like Rupert Murdoch of Fox News and News Corporation who are climate change deniers or «doubters», the media in general in the United States and other key countries has suppressed or downplayed the story of global warming, delegating it to obscure web - only blogs or leaving it out entirely of their offerings.

Chris Schoneveld: Aren't most of us on this blog interested in the science of «solar influence» on temperature / climate along with the science of other influences (e.g., trade winds «driving» the ENSO) and accurate gathering of data?

Back in the early spring of 2007, believers of catastrophic man - caused global warming were no doubt quite happy with Al Gore's «An Inconvenient Truth» movie, Ross Gelbspan's books, prominent pro-global warming blogs, mainstream media outlets, and others who gave essentially no fair play to the presentation of detailed climate assessments from skeptic climate scientists.

John Carter wrote: > For libertarian conservatives, there is a chance to learn and grow about the issue, but only if they don't use as their source blogs like this (and many others that are far worse) that continue to post clever philosophical musings to chip away at the basic idea of climate change...

For libertarian conservatives, there is a chance to learn and grow about the issue, but only if they don't use as their source blogs like this (and many others that are far worse) that continue to post clever philosophical musings to chip away at the basic idea of climate change, rather assess what those actual facts of the issue are, and more importantly, why they are relevant.

Expanded climate communications Heartland plays an important role in climate communications, especially through our in - house experts (e.g., Taylor) through his Forbes blog and related high profile outlets, our conferences, and through coordination with external networks (such as WUWT and other groups capable of rapidly mobilizing responses to new scientific findings, news stories, or unfavorable blog posts).

A recent paper Internet Blogs, Polar Bears, and Climate - Change Denial by Proxy by JEFFREY A. HARVEY and 13 others has been creating somewhat of a stir in the blogosphere.

Along with the sheer unpleasantness of the moderators at Real Climate and other alarmist blogs, the Guardian's practice of summarily banning anyone who does not follow exactly the party line as laid down by the Klimatariat has driven more people to become sceptics than any deep study of the science ever has.

Well, I don't suppose anyone reads this far down the comments anyway — I usually don't — , so here goes: As much as I admire S. McIntyre and value his contribution in creating and maintaining this blog — and, for what it's worth, I see him as a veritable reincarnation of Richard Feynman in terms of scientific rigor and integrity and brilliance — , for me this post and some others similar to it are «Climate Audit Lite», which are ultimately not especially satisfying.

I read this blog and others and I'm aware of a very wide range of skeptical opinions concerning climate data.

I'm afraid that much of the strength of the reaction to your questions was based on past experiences - I can not count how many times someone has commented here and on other climate blogs claiming despite the evidence that mismatches between specific projections and observed temperatures somehow invalidate all climate modeling, despite the projected emissions not matching actuals.

But, however one rationalizes it, this «lack of warming» has caused quite a bit of stir in climate circles (as witnessed by this and many other blog sites)

Meanwhile Gavin and the other members of the Team at the Real Climate (RC) blog have gone into overdrive in moderating any commenter who ask any reasonable questions about all of this.

*** Of course, Dr. Curry could handle such comments in the forthright, time - honored climate change blog manner of censoring comments, deleting them, or banning posters as we find at blogs like RealClimate, ClimateSight and others run by real scientistOf course, Dr. Curry could handle such comments in the forthright, time - honored climate change blog manner of censoring comments, deleting them, or banning posters as we find at blogs like RealClimate, ClimateSight and others run by real scientistof censoring comments, deleting them, or banning posters as we find at blogs like RealClimate, ClimateSight and others run by real scientists.