Sentences with phrase «on manmade warming»

With these outlets included, almost eight percent of print media quotes were from those casting doubt on manmade warming.

Romney's running mate, Paul Ryan, has gone as far to challenge the motives of climate scientists who have published academic papers on manmade warming.

Not exact matches

He and Gingrich don't disagree on evolution and manmade global warming probably happening, but the ex-governor does have a firmer grasp on what's required to deal with the economic crisis of our time.

And about 70 percent of his fans among weekly worshipers agree on the seriousness of global warming, while about 40 percent agree it is manmade.

It is virtually certain that 2015 will be the warmest year on record, with one of the strongest El Niños ever recorded combining with manmade warming to send global temperatures soaring.

The UN's IPCC misled the press and public into believing that thousands of scientists backed its claims on manmade global warming, according to Mike Hulme, a prominent climate scientist and IPCC insider.

It is virtually certain that 2015 will be the warmest year on record, with one of the strongest El Ninos ever recorded combining with manmade warming to send global temperatures soaring.

The now conventional view on global warming, as stated by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, is that most of the warming recorded in the past 50 years has been caused by emissions of manmade greenhouse gases.

I honestly think she's too young to be listening to me going on and on about such confusing stuff as oil, gas, coal, greenhouse effect, global warming, manmade climate change, population explosion (she knows about it), deforestation, desertification, rapid extinction of other species, pollution, problems, overconsumption, overindustrialization, problems, politics, economics, consumerism, and problems, religion, war, etc., etc., etc..

Field is listed on the Global Warming Petition Project calling for the U.S. to reject international global warming agreements, while claiming there is «no convincing evidence» that manmade greenhouse gases will disrupt the earth's cWarming Petition Project calling for the U.S. to reject international global warming agreements, while claiming there is «no convincing evidence» that manmade greenhouse gases will disrupt the earth's cwarming agreements, while claiming there is «no convincing evidence» that manmade greenhouse gases will disrupt the earth's climate.

The most dizzying response to the revelation that the paper was a fake came on globalwarminghoax.com, which says it is devoted to «refuting the myth of manmade global warming.»

More than 650 scientists from around the world dispute the claims made by the United Nations and former Vice President Al Gore about global warming, saying that science does not support that climate change is a manmade phenomenon, according to a posting on the Senate environmental committee's press blog.

An atmospheric scientist and evangelical Christian, Hayhoe is a firm believer in manmade climate change and recently addressed a UN-sponsored climate change conference in Edmonton, Alberta, on the woes that await the human race if global warming is not curbed.

10: Given that the authors of the largest ever survey of peer - reviewed opinion in learned papers marked only 64 of 11,944 papers, or 0.5 %, as stating they agreed with the official «consensus» proposition that recent warming was mostly manmade, on what rational, evidence - based, scientific ground is it daily asserted that «97 % of scientists» believe recent global warming is not only manmade but dangerous?

It was in this hearing that Inhofe made his notorious claim that «manmade global warming is the greatest hoax ever perpetrated on the American people.»

The theory of manmade global warming has been on the decline since the 2009 Climategate scandal revealed that the «science» behind the theory was far from objective.

That's how the contradictions happen because they aren't basing their claims on a consistent framework but are just hack and slashing manmade global warming with whatever they can and so don't spot contradictions.

In that paper, we revealed that only 41, or 0.3 %, of 11,944 learned papers on climate and related topics published in the journals over the 21 years 1991 - 2011 had stated that recent global warming was mostly manmade.

How convenient that Al Gore can blame malaria on manmade global warming.

We question the manmade part, especially since the earth has warmed and cooled all on its own for millions of years.

Since 1950, we have added 75 % of all GHGs, and the warming has been a further 0.7 C. Thirty - year averaged temperatures put into perspective that the later century through now is nothing like the earlier part, and was added on top of it, being understood quantifiably because of the dominant manmade forcing change during the same period.

Most climate researchers don't just «assume» the warming is manmade, they defer to the body of scientific literature on the subject.

Ben van Beurden, the Shell chief executive, has repeatedly stated that the fossil fuel giant is a responsible company that fully accepts the need to counter manmade global warming, has campaigned for a tax on greenhouse gas emissions, and is moving its focus from oil to cleaner fuels such as gas.

Perhaps it is because during the Obama years, work on climate change issues all started from a mandated conclusion: That manmade global warming was settled science and that it was bad and getting worse.

Concerning the recent warming believed to be caused by manmade CO2 emissions, in the scrutiny of my own I have found that the assessments of IPCC are totally wrong: on the basis of cutting of human CO2 emissions there is impossible to reach any working decision to control warming.

I watched the shows with friends who are both «believers» & «sceptics» and surprisingly the «believers» commented that both shows, in different ways, were hardly concealed propaganda pieces in support of the so called consensus on manmade global warming.

Mr. Christy is generous to discuss man's contribution (to warming) but, in the process, he validates the adulteration and upward - biased adjustment of the temperature records (to create a manmade on paper global warming) which has become a cottage industry in climate science.

These statements are false, as is the book's contention that the overwhelming majority of scientists do not agree on the manmade cause of global warming.

The recent listing of polar bears as «endangered» was based on junk science and GIGO computer models that claim manmade global warming will send the bears» record population numbers into oblivion.

But where would manmade global warming «science» be if it relied on just facts?

Nonetheless, with the passage of time, Pope Francis has seemed to take an ever more decided stance behind the notion of manmade global warming, while sending signals that there was not much room for debate on the issue.

However, the IPCC objective is to related a link to manmade global warming which is the basis for their objective to have a unified global government action on carbon control and mitigation.

The panel reports that on every continent except Antarctica, manmade warming is likely to have made a substantial contribution to the surface temperature (6).

They supported this with poor science and because they blamed the whole fact on manmade global warming, they were able to convince very intelligent scientist that their assumption was correct even with their suspect facts and the assumption became a peer reviewed fact with no facts to support it except poor science and blaming it on man created global warming.

However, readers of my column will know that I give contrarians, or sceptics, or deniers (call them what you will) short shrift, and as a close follower of the scientific debate on this subject I can state without doubt that there is no dispute whatsoever within the expert community as to the reality or causes of manmade global warming.

Witness the US Republican politicians, for example, where not one of them believes the science of significant manmade warming coming, and so they focus on the scientists themselves rather than coming up with a policy.

«With all the hysteria, all the fear, all the phony science, could it be that manmade global warming is the greatest hoax ever perpetrated on the American people?

What all this means is that there is not a single effective instrument for containing manmade global warming anywhere on earth.

Climate Change Reconsidered proves there is no «consensus» on dangerous manmade global warming — and raises the debate to a new level.

«The [IPCC has] misled the press and public into believing that thousands of scientists backed its claims on manmade global warming, according to Dr Mike Hulme, a prominent climate scientist and UN-IPCC insider.

Finding: Several members of the Panel were unsuited to be panellists, having strong connections to UEA or having a tendency to make alarmist statements on the impact of manmade global warming.

The AGW platform has been built on the premise that manmade CO2 emissions (a very small % of what is released into the atmosphere) has caused / exacerbated the recent global warming (which stopped 8 - 10 years ago).

When the cycle is on the upswing they get panicky about manmade warming and on the downswing they get panicky about global cooling.

If manmade global warming was real, then back in the 1930's through the 1970's when there were virtually no controls on emitions, the earth should have been the hottest ever.

If on the first graph, one were to put a straight line fit for a 35 year period between 1908 to 1943 (ie., before substantial manmade CO2 emissions) and another straight line fit for a 35 year period between 1960 and 1995 (ie., when manmade emissions are said to be significant), those lines would run parallel to one another and the gradient of the later line would not be steeper than the gradient of the earlier line thereby suggesting that the data does not show an increased rate of warming during the period when there was anthropogenic CO2 emissions.

The UN's Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change misled the press and public into believing that thousands of scientists backed its claims on manmade global warming, according to Mike Hulme, a prominent climate scientist and IPCC insider.

Both the Guardian and the Independent have much longer reports by their science correspondents on a new report from the University of East Anglia: «Climate change at the poles IS man - made» (Independent) and «Manmade global warming evident on every continent, polar report finds» (Guardian).

Come on lets at least mention the manmade warming estimate his numbers produce shall we!

With the discussion biased in such a way no wonder so many people go away thinking nothing is known on various subjects and thinking that each new fad overturns manmade global warming.

As the Environmental Protection Agency nears a final ruling that manmade global warming endangers the public health and welfare, «the chamber will tell the EPA in a filing today that a trial - style public hearing» on the science of climate change is needed to «make a fully informed, transparent decision with scientific integrity based on the actual record of the science.»