Sentences with phrase «skeptical scientists work»

Grijalva's letter targets universities where noted skeptical scientists work, including MIT's Dr. Richard Lindzen, Georgia Tech's Dr. Judith Curry, Colorado's Dr. Roger Pielke Jr. and the University of Alabama's John Christy and Roy Spencer.

Not exact matches

Blair, too, remained «somewhat skeptical» that an oath for scientists and engineers would work.

But the newly obtained documents show that Dr. Carlin's highly skeptical views on global warming, which have been known for more than a decade within the small unit where he works, have been repeatedly challenged by scientists inside and outside the E.P.A.; that he holds a doctorate in economics, not in atmospheric science or climatology; that he has never been assigned to work on climate change; and that his comments on the endangerment finding were a product of rushed and at times shoddy scholarship, as he acknowledged Thursday in an interview.

The e-mail exchanges among several prominent American and British climate - change scientists appear to reveal efforts to keep the work of skeptical scientists out of major journals and the possible hoarding and manipulation of data to overstate the case for human - caused climate change.

In any case, you of all people should understand why people would be skeptical of a paper that seems to contradict a large body of work by a large number of top notch scientists including apparently Hansen and AR5.

At a September 27, 2014 panel discussion at Queens Museum titled «Climate Wars: Propaganda, Debate, and the Propaganda of Debate,» Hoggan revealed that he was inspired to start DeSmogBlog by the work of Ross Gelbspan, a retired journalist who helped launch the modern environmental movement and spread the slanderous narrative of Al Gore's Earth in the Balance (page 160) that skeptical scientists are paid shills of fossil fuel companies hired to neutralize public support for government climate programs.

They excluded almost all of the relevant work of arguably the most prominent skeptical or lukewarm climate scientist in the world.

They conferred awards and recognition on each other, excluded skeptical scientists from «peer reviews» of one another's papers, and conspired to blackball editors who permitted the publication of professional papers by Sallie Baliunas, Willie Soon, Patrick Michaels, Richard Lindzen, Roy Spencer and other climate experts whose work challenged the Mann - made global warming disaster thesis.

McKitrick is considered by many on the «skeptical» side of the debate to be an absolutely key player in the debate about climate change, and the veracity / viability climate scientists and the work they produce.

«We don't fully understand how to input things like changes in the oceans, and because we don't fully understand it you could say that natural variability is now working to suppress the warming,» Jones admitted to the paper, apparently acknowledging what skeptical climate scientists have been attempting to convey for years.

At least Maxwell was a good scientist skeptical of his own work his entire life.

It is «hard» scientists who disagreements with their work, but there is even disagreement among these skeptical «hard» scientists.

However, much of the evidence put forward thus far has shown correlations between sea ice loss and particular weather patterns, but has not revealed the direct physical connections and causation between the two, leading many mainstream climate scientists to be skeptical of the work so far.

It proved more convincingly, they said, that the skeptical scientists were a fringe element that had to rely increasingly on industry money and peripheral scientific journals to promote their work.

Serious readers here learn to be skeptical of broad - brush dismissals of scientists» work by self - proclaimed experts.

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change lead author, Stephen Schneider of Stanford University, has previously rebuked the arguments of political scientist Bjorn Lomborg, contained in his book, The Skeptical Environmentalist, for «selective inattention to inconvenient literature and overemphasis of work that supports his lopsided views».

As a researcher who has utilized priming methods, this concerns me, and as a scientist, I've been trained to be skeptical and critical even of my own work.