Sentences with phrase «sceptical science»

The Sceptical Science kidz and Trenberth think that the deep ocean has absorbed all the heat that isn't showing up in the atmosphere, and that's [why] we have «the pause».

Over at SCEPTICAL SCIENCE they went bananas!!

Websites such as Realclimate and Sceptical Science provide a great service for those more deeply interested, but the great majority of the population never access them.

It's one of the reasons I enjoy visiting Sceptical Science and Peter Hadfield's YouTube channel.

Hence the recent Harrabin Q&A session giving prominence to past temperature change and and the Guardian series on the CRU hack leading with a profile of Steve McIntyre and going on to discuss the supposed suppression of sceptical science by climate scientists.

Rather than go into many details I'll just say Tamino and Daniel Bailey of «Sceptical Science» two arch AGWs accused me of being fraud, falsifying the data.

Engelbeen has tried with his mass balance equation, and the good folk on sceptical science (point 72 on the full list of Most Used Arguments) have done their best to prove to me that it's us.

He merely reports the work of others); or he is deliberately ignoring the sceptical science, in which case his programme was hypocritical propaganda.

Sceptical Science made a recent post on the Dunning - Kruger effect that you might like to read and think about: http://www.skepticalscience.com/The-Dunning-Kruger-effect-and-the-climate-debate.html

Irrespective of the scientific merits of the S&B paper, I have never encountered such a load of ill - mannered louts as «Joshua», «Sceptical Science» etc..

I highly recommend the Sceptical Science web site.

Not exact matches

As the cautionary principle in all applications of science has been grossly abused by commercial giants in all fields of science, the church will not hasten to reassure a rightly sceptical public.

Science and religion do come together «in persons», but it needs to be in persons who can give answers to a sceptical world and restore the full Catholic vision of Creation in Christ.

BHA: State - funded Steiner schools teach science from book sceptical of evolution, give homeopathy to students

You are here: News > State - funded Steiner schools teach science from book sceptical of evolution, give homeopathy to students

Over the past few years, several US states and local school boards have introduced measures that would mean teachers must include the views of those who are sceptical of a human influence on climate change in science lessons.

«The only thing that I am sceptical about is that only three individuals have been tested,» says Leonid Krivitskiy, a physicist at the Agency for Science Technology and Research in Singapore.

Although many people are sceptical of its New Age reputation, Astrology has been a trusted science for thousands of years, predating Psychology and Astronomy.

I also thought the scene where the most sceptical of the hostages was describing in detail what the science fiction Hollywood movie was about was very good, as were the few snippets of some great music (Dire Straits, Led Zeppelin etc).

(Or are you another one «sceptical» about the science?

Probably best addressed by «accentuating the positive» — talking more about the discoveries of Science and including basic summaries of why this unseats sceptical opinion.

Please understand I'm being sceptical about some things, because this is a science forum and we should be sceptics.

I beg to disagree with the basic thesis of this article: that the public are becoming more sceptical about climate change through a failure to understand the science.

Here is just one sceptical response to Nordhaus: 1) «The finding that global temperatures are rising over the last century - plus is one of the most robust findings of climate science and statistics.»

This is why I demand anyone who makes big claims about climate science, whether sceptical or catastrophic, show me the evidence.

In other words, this article is not about the science, but about the reporting of the science by Monbiot of the Guardian, and Connor of the Independent, who will cite any ad hoc comment by a scientist which counters a sceptical argument, as if the simple fact that it is uttered by a scientist demolished the sceptical argument.

As an aside, anyone who isn't sceptical has no business in science, which does raise issues about non-sceptical «pro-science» blogs, but I guess this is neither the time nor the place.

There are many different reasons why citizens may be sceptical of aspects of climate science, certainly why they may be sceptical of knowledge claims which get exaggerated by media and lobbyists.

For me, that begins with people accepting that there is no hiding place left in the science — the overwhelming consensus of the vast body of scientists that study climate is that the trends we are seeing in the air, the oceans and in our ecosystems are entirely consistent with the theory of global warming, while the alternatives offered by sceptical scientists — even the much heralded role of the Sun — so far fail that test.

So I'd like to throw this back to you Geoff — if things like the NEP are flawed, and if you see our scales for measuring climate change scepticism and its relationship to ideology as not capturing the essence of why people are sceptical about climate change, how should social science seek to understand people's beliefs about the environment and climate change?

Someone needs to write up the current state of climate science using a book like this to get through the sceptical denialism:

Perhaps, angry frustration from the barrage of media and political propaganda, felt by the ever - expanding sceptical community, (which is, much to the surprise of pollsters, dominated by well qualified professionals), was the catalyst that sent climate science into the blog hit statosphere with a bullet.

Jerry Ravetz is of an age where trust in science is more important to him than the advancement of any particular theory, and it is of great credit to him that he was willing to listen to my climate sceptical viewpoint and put himself in the firing line.

In my opinion it demonstrates bad faith on the part of the BBC in failing to present to the public the details of the sceptical argument about climategate and «climate science» yet allowing those involved to present their defence without serious challenge.

The Horizon program is the BBC's flagship science program, so when it uses the weight of the BBC's authority alongside, Sir Professor Paul Nurse, a Nobel Laureate and the new President of the Royal Society it has a clear responsibilty to the public to fairly present the detail of the sceptical views climate science and the issues around the climategate emails.

Science is an ongoing self - correcting enterprise, Cook and al have made their raw data available so that the impacts of the various flaws could easily be quantified, heck the readership of the more popular «sceptical» websites could do their own ratings in a week or so.

------------------------------- Skeptical Science trying to predict sceptical reaction to the paper: http://www.hi-izuru.org/forum/The%20Consensus%20Project/2012-03-07-Skeptic%20reactions.html Cook not exactly sounding neutral (a perhaps little paranoid?)

I believe that in this type of BBC science program the public has an expectation that the BBC would present fairly both pro and sceptical arguments on the issues in enough detail to allow the public to take own view.

The issue I have with this program and the BBC is not who is right or wrong in climate science, but the failure of the BBC to fairly present in the program the sceptical arguments in detail (which it must be fully aware of) with respect to climate science, the climategate emails and the inquiries to the general public.

So humiliated were these societies that they had been so utterly hoodwinked as to the veracity of the so called science that enmasse, they withdrew their support for the «consensus» and called for a return to fundamental scientific principles in dealings with climate science and for the restoration of a healthy sceptical scientific community.

Being sceptical by nature I like to see proper reasoned and preferably science backed answers to my questions — and this is a brilliant place to find them.

Moderator of the discussion group «Sceptical Climate Science» [2] groups.yahoo.com/group / climatesceptics

Science is by its nature sceptical: scientists interrogate information and only on repeated investigation does data become sScience is by its nature sceptical: scientists interrogate information and only on repeated investigation does data become sciencescience.

Moreover, by applying the term «denial» (with all its loaded undertones) to sceptical scientists; by referring to them inaccurately as «well funded» by the oil industry; and by likening those who stress the uncertainties of climate science to unprincipled lobbyists for tobacco companies, Lord May enters on the field of personal vilification — not a suitable place for a distinguished former President of the Royal Society.

It is in particular a standing rebuke to all those alarmists who deny the existence of hard science supporting the sceptical case.

Myron Ebell, of the Competitive Enterprise Institute, said: «I think climategate is nowhere near done and people will become more sceptical as they find out more and more about how these conclusions were not based on science but were in fact based on political calculation.»

I do find the old threads have a certain earnestness and freshness that reflects a more genuine attempt at discourse between sceptical commenters and orthodox climate science.

I'm sure that blogs, both sceptical and pro AGW activist, have more crap than science magazines.

I am openly sceptical of the state of climate science which does NOT mean I'm some loony conspiracy theorist who won't listen to reason.

We need to aim for a well understood, well policed gold standard for any presentation of science in policy literature: hopefully this can be addressed to everyone's satisfaction in AR5, although I note that Dr Curry is somewhat sceptical about this.