Sentences with phrase «real climate scientists»

On a number of occasions in the midst of conversations / debates on AGW / ACC (got to keep the «A» in the conversation), someone (sometimes including journalists) will say that the so - called skeptics / deniers are not real climate scientists, etc., I'll simply email them your link and ask that they actually spend a few minutes reading it over.

Instead of trashing real climate scientists who study nuclear winter as stooges of KGB manipulation, maybe the FBI should see if the Wegman fiasco might be an actual example of their observation that «foreign researchers may be under pressure to make their research conclude what their government wants it to conclude, or they may be ordered to write completely fabricated studies.»

Houston, Texas (CCNF) July 11, 2015 — Already a trusted source for citizens and educators wanting to hear what real climate scientists have to say about climate change, CCNF has now opened up its online forum to an ongoing discussion on values and begun hosting a bipartisan debate on climate policy -LSB-...]

Today's Graph of the Day shows that all those climate deniers that spoke of «the global temperature plateau «(as some weird «evidence» that climate change would not be real, busted on numerous occasions) should openly admit they were wrong — as real climate scientists have explained all along.

If that makes the science unsettled when compared to the billions of data points accumulated by thousands of real climate scientists working over fifty years, then nothing will ever be settled enough for you.

Some — instead of calculating the trend — simply draw a line between these two years *, and for unapparent ** reasons that is not just opportunistic climate skeptics, but also real climate scientists with a funny definition of decades.

So far, if the revealed correspondence is correct and even faintly in context, it seems like we have PROOF that real climate scientists privately find little to respect in their denialist harriers.

There's a reason that real climate scientists rarely post at WUWT.

As we know from basic quantum mechanics, bosons like a company (as opposed to fermions who obey Pauli exclusion principle) and this means, probably, that there is slightly higher probability for new photon from GHG - s to be radiated upwards (btw I asked this question some 5 years ago at Realclimate, and real climate scientists told me that this should be negligible, I tend to agree).

Of course real climate scientists believe no such thing, but its so much easier for the deniers to argue with the caricature of a climate science that they hold in their head, than to argue with an actual climate scientist...

That's actually a good idea, although our unskilled - and - unaware - of - it friend may not care for the treatment his links receive from Real Climate scientists.

Now the question is, can the real climate scientists come forward and present the truth about global warming, or are we in for more ridiculous predictions about an ice free arctic by 2013 and the extinction of polar bears?

The idea that our finite resources can be used until they are gone and that we can continue to be irresponsible with what this planet offers is absurd and aggravating to real climate scientists.

However, most of the high - level talks will take place at the first day, and the subsequent three days will be devoted to the real climate scientists.

I wonder when NRK will actually let a real climate scientist thoroughly and without interruptions debunk some of the specific arguments that the deniers are promoting.

Christensen also promoted Heartland's climate change reports which he said were from «real climate scientists» and showed «the science is nowhere near to being settled».

Dr Lindzen of MIT, a real climate scientist says just that!