Sentences with phrase «sceptics think»

And climate sceptics think it is somehow cynical and disgusting for anyone to point this out http://t.co/UYs7m9am0L

Do we sceptics all think about this problem with a different region of the brain to the warmists?

A lot of sceptics think the AGW hypothesis is sufficiently falsified already, so the «urgency» clause does not pertain, and so «special treatment» of the issue is not required.

Phrenology because some sceptics think that climate science is at the same level.

That is the tactic that the sceptic think tanks adopted when they attacked you, Mike.

During the investigation, William Happer also outlined details of the unofficial peer review process run by the Global Warming Policy Foundation (GWPF), a UK climate sceptic think tank.

You can then read these climate sceptics thoughts for yourself and judge them on the merits of their arguments and make up your own mind, something sadly I imagine many «climate change activists» never do, just relying on the Sourcewatch review.

Not exact matches

I think the articles of open climate sceptics like Joe reduces the credibility of WA Business News as a paper.

This is a very well spoken article, i am le tell it truly comes from the heart as i read on, personally i think that all of these sceptics out there should read this article that way people can understand more about why the burial occured with such haste!

The writing throughout is very accessible, and any Tolkien fan will enjoy reading it, but I suspect it would not persuade a sceptic to take LOTR seriously, nor do I think the author is saying anything particularly unique.

Well, I happen to think they are dead wrong, and hopefully this article will help you put a stone in the sceptic's shoe which irritates them enough to open up the the possibility of considering the evidence further.

«I think that the sceptics or cynics would say that he isn't a standout character and put a negative spin on it.

It was significant, I thought, that the first senior Cabinet minister to turn up in Downing Street on Sunday evening for pre-talks talks - or as No 10 put it «to discuss the latest state of play on the EU renegotiation» — was Theresa May, the Euro - sceptic leaning Home Secretary.

Those in favour of a break with the EU often paint a rosy picture in which the UK is able to get what it wants and maintain unfettered access to the single market while sceptics tend to assume that the EU can not offer to renege on some core principle like the freedom of movement for persons but at this stage it's mostly guesswork (and possibly quite a bit of bluff / wishful thinking on both sides).

But equal - opportunity rigour demands Nigeria unity - sceptics too clinically cut - and - thrust with him, without risking the toga of being branded «sectional» in their thinking.

As policy in South Korea looks like shifting, many sceptics remain who think that no amount of talking to Kim Jong - un will persuade him to renounce either his despotic power or his nuclear ambitions.

On a wider point, there are EU sceptics in the Labour Party too and many LidDem voters (but not, I think, members) are highly EU sceptic.

Mr Redwood's supporters - drawn from the right of the party and strongly Euro - sceptic - just could not stomach the thought of a Euro - phile left - winger as leader.

He thought Blair and Gordon Brown were trying to be more Euro - sceptic than the Conservatives and announced in a panic that his party would never sign up to the single currency under any circumstances.

I'm not a climate scientist, just an interested layperson, and I thought I'd seen all the sceptic arguments, but this is a new one for me.

It is anecdotes like this which impress the non-scientists and make them think that perhaps the sceptics are on to something after all.

CEO Satya Nadella is a known Xbox sceptic, so I think it's not too far fetched that Xbox is basically constantly fighting for recocnition and money within the whole company.

I'm finding myself aligned with the sceptics now — this started as a «competition» to make the bottle impactful and I think it's getting sidetracked into making the bottle appeal to people who've read the blog and or are in the community.

I think as all the comments and I can tell you that the situation in France (and undoubtely overall in Europe) is the same than in US concerning the sceptics arguments.

I've been discussing climate change with lots of people at campaign stalls recently, and it has opened my eyes as to how far this «balanced» climate sceptic reporting is shaping the thinking of even those people who are concerned and want to see some action («I am aware that flying might make climate change worse, but I'll still do it because the warming may just be part of a natural cycle — I would stop if I was more certain»; «I am worried, but I have also heard that it is just water vapour which makes us warmer, so we just don't kow if this CO2 thing is true, everybody seems to have a different agenda» etc.).

I think public debates on television etc between climate scientists and climate sceptics are a VERY bad idea.

The trouble with a lot of you sceptics is you just don't think or read widely enough.

I can think of plenty of British sceptics, but they're mostly journalists, politicians or people associated with think tanks.

But I can't actually think of any British scientist with a solid record of published research in climate science who is a sceptic, so maybe this isn't surprising.

I think it would be really nice for all those sceptics that claim that models are just «garbage in», garbage out» to look at these two graphs.

Why is it that if a sceptical thought is expressed the very first thing the «true believers» do is characterize the sceptic.

You may think me a «denier» or «sceptic» — but my motivation is different: being a physicist from material science field I am reasonably far removed from political pressures and conflicts.

Since they denigrate the sceptics so much (the remaining 3 %) and declare publicly that they should not have a voice; I'm betting the politicians also think that 97 % of the public also believe it.

Unfortunately for Harrabin, who thinks the convergence of the sceptics and the consensus is new, and therefore an interesting development, the Climate Wars series and Michaels» 2002 paper show that sceptics» estimates haven't changed much.

No, I don't think all sceptics are the same (as I pointed out at 1.44 pm).

As someone who would like to think of themselves as a rational sceptic, it seems sensible for the US (and UK) miltary to base their thinking on the following:

And if you think about the hundreds of reports over the years by the BBC, climate sceptics are a very and increasingly rare species.

Or do you think the BBC should give more air time to climate change critics / sceptics?

If you look at the whole argument... If you look at the historical difference between [sceptics vs scientists] The sceptics have said initially there's no warming, then they've said it's not down to man, and now they do seem, you do seem to be coming more into line with the international body of thinking over what is going to happen in the future.

I also think that some sceptics have too readily seized on this as evidence of future cooling in the same way that the strong advocated of cAGW seize on any and all extreme weather events as evidence of «climate change».

So you think the leading lights of climatology would have paid greater attention to the sceptics had they approached them as lickspittles begging a favour from the Great Gods?

It sounded like Roger thought sceptics were now changing their tune but clearly, with lower sensitivity, The Pause and no hope of any global policy harmony on the horizon, the strains that are coming from the alarmist camp now have much more of a sceptic air.

If you think «all» sceptics share the same views and make the same claims, I'm afraid you are the deluded one.

There's Andreas Ernst, who compares the psychology of sceptics to that of rats, and Steven Moffic, who thinks that aversion therapy involving the use of «distressing images of the projected ravages of global warming» can cure sceptics of their sociopathy.

I thought one of the sceptic points was that argument from authority was meaningless.

The number of public sceptics who hold tenured chairs in our universities is very small indeed, and I can think of no junior staff member who has ventured a sceptical opinion.

It makes me ill to think that sceptics have to engage this nitwit (we do!)

And Judith wonders, or pretends to, just why we don't consider the term «sceptic» to be the most appropriate for those, like yourself, who don't think rationally.

A «free - thinking» of sceptics has a nice ring An «independence» A «Won't Get Fooled Again» A «Chilling» — as in «chill out» A «Calmness»

Now that certainly doesn't mean all people thought this, and there may be other types of consequences that sceptics might accept as good outcomes, e.g. reducing pollution, reducing reliance on foreign oil.