Sentences with phrase «on climate skeptics»

There are many smart, informed people on the climate skeptic side of the debate (see here).

Headlines like «2014: The Most Dishonest Year on Record» have been posted on climate skeptic blogs, such as Watts Up With That, and a commentator for the popular British newspaper The Daily Mail all but accused NASA of lying to the press and the public about global temperatures, despite the open discussion of uncertainties both in NASA's press materials and during a press conference with audio that is publicly accessible.

Conservative operatives like Bast ultimately see climate policy as a threat to small government and refer to attacks on climate skeptics as an intricate liberal conspiracy.

In light of these many complex factors, for scientists to angrily and emotionally focus on climate skeptics as the primary source of societal inaction is a major distraction and it reflects their own perceptual biases.

The PBS» Frontline programme recently aired an hour - long report on climate policy over the past four years, focusing on the climate skeptics, and more specifically, Heartland Institute, the home base of the climate deniers or skeptics.

Now that the 24hour - athon has been over for a day — I wasn't able to watch any of it on my 10 year - old iMac — did anybody actually see him do the «full - on assault on climate skeptics, exploring where they get their funding from» that he promised he'd do?

Joe Romm gives his take on the climate skeptic blog «Watts Up With That?»

I had (somewhat naively; o) hoped a peer - reviewed paper explaining some of these basic issues would go some way to preventing the promulgation of these arguments on climate skeptic blogs, but of course it didn't.

The hacker then placed a brief comment on a more obscure climate skeptic site called the Air Vent maintained by Patrick Condon (aka Jeff «Id») and a long comment on Climate Skeptic identical to the WUWT comment, both linking to the Russian FTP site.

Scientists do have better things to do with their time than answer questions raised on climate skeptic blogs, and as a result, you will only generally be assured of a climate change paper taking a stance on the cause of the change if the subject of the paper is an attribution study.

The release of the news about the retraction has been a messy affair, with a Google cache version of an «embargoed» post about the situation circulating on the web yesterday, and then the story apparently breaking on climate skeptic blog Watts Up With That.

Australian Prime Minister Kevin Rudd has spewed out a rhetorical barrage on climate skeptics worldwide, saying skeptics «are too «dangerous to ignore» and are «holding the world to ransom».

In it, cognitive scientist Stephan Lewandowsky and his colleagues survey and analyze the outcry generated on climate skeptic blogs to their earlier work on climate denial.

I've been following many of the discusions on both climate skeptic and climate audit, but this piece provoked a line of thought that has been scratching at the back of my mind for some time.

When scientists and advocates, motivated by these biased perceptions, take action by responding with tit - for - tat attacks on climate skeptics, it takes energy and effort away from offering a positive message and engagement campaign that builds public support for climate action and instead feeds a downward spiral of «war» and conflict rhetoric that appears as just more ideological rancor to the wider public.

You would think that the onus would be on the climate skeptics to demonstrate that CO2 behaves differently in the atmosphere than it does in the laboratory.

The president packed last week's big climate speech with calls to heed scientists» warnings, a strong attack on climate skeptics, and full - throated claims that the planetary stakes are immense.

On climate skeptics: «The IPCC is certainly open to those who are skeptical of climate change and global warming to come into our arena and present their views.»