Not exact matches
The reason progressives constantly obscure the meaning of
terms like
skeptic, «
global warming,» «AGW» (when you mean CAGW), is so you can convert your political opinions into «science,» and then falsely label your political opponents as anti-science.
Santer et al. also debunked the «
skeptic» myths that
global warming is just due to internal variability, and that a short -
term slowing in the rate of
warming means
global warming has magically stopped.
«Avatar» director James Cameron double - dared
global warming disaster
skeptics to debate him — then morphed into a chicken and cackled off when they accepted his increasingly ludicrous debate
terms, calling his critics «swine» as he headed for the hills.
When constantly confronted with this myth that
global warming stopped in 1998, or 2000, or 2002, or 2005, or [insert year], we wonder why distinguishing between short -
term noise and long -
term signal is such a difficult concept for climate «
skeptics.»
Originally denoted «climate change
skeptics» or «anthropogenic (human - induced)
global warming skeptics», the
term referred to those who are as yet unconvinced by evidence that emissions of man - made CO2 significantly enhance the natural atmospheric greenhouse effect.
The use of the
term «
global warming skeptic» is falling into disuse.
I'm alternately told by «
skeptics» (1) it's regional impact that's important, (2) it's
global data that's more important, (3) there is no such thing as «
global temperatures,» (4) «
skeptics» are not monolithic, (5) «
skeptics» don't doubt that
global temperatures are
warming (and that it is to some extent influenced by AC02), or alternately «we dismiss non-
Global data), (6) all methodologyies used to determine
global temps are unreliable, (7)
global warming has stopped, (8) we're experiencing
global cooling, (9) what matters is long
term trends, (10) short -
term trends are significant, (11) what's happening in Arctic isn't important (because it's regional), (12) what's happening in the Antarctic is important (despite it being regional).
John H, my point is that the
global warming skeptics don't deserve the
term «
skeptic».
Imagine how much «
skeptics» would trip if a textbook for students contained the
term «
global warming denier».
December 5, 2014 Public discussion of scientific topics such as
global warming is confused by misuse of the
term «
skeptic.»
Public discussion of scientific topics such as
global warming is confused by misuse of the
term «
skeptic.»