Derision from deniers Muller's work has been
rejected by climate skeptics, including some he once called collaborators.
Not exact matches
Ideologically motivated «
climate skeptics» know that these data contradict their claims, and respond...
by rejecting the measurements.
«If the manuscripts of
climate change
skeptics are
rejected by peer - reviewed science journals, they can always send their studies to Energy and Environment.»
The WG1 report was authored and reviewed
by approximately 2000 scientists with varying expertise in
climate and related fields, and so having a list of over 30,000 scientists that
rejected the WG1's conclusions was a powerful meme that AGW
skeptics and deniers could use to cast doubt on the IPCC's conclusions and, indirectly, on the entire theory of
climate disruption.
When the «
climate science community» takes steps to control for biases — and those steps are
rejected by some «
skeptics,» it leaves me wondering what those «
skeptics» are really interested in.
Energy and Environment has been described as the place
climate change
skeptics go to when they are
rejected by the mainstream peer - reviewed science publications.
As such,
climate skeptics must petition to Congress to ban all IPCC scientists from making testimonies and
reject IPCC reports unless corroborated
by scientific studies outside the purview of IPCC.
Of course this can be alleviated
by using more genetically - modified crops giving better yields, but those dang
climate skeptics are just so loud in their anti-science crusade it is causing people to
reject science even in agriculture.