Sentences with phrase «than climate scientists»

If he gets more coverage than climate scientists, I suppose it's because his message is so much more extreme.

For example, weather reporters do not generally have expertise in climate science, and have much less scientific training than climate scientists.

In short, do people other than climate scientist and regular visitors to real climate understand that its all bunk?

In other words, with more nitrogen available, plant life might be able to absorb more CO2 than climate scientists have been estimating, which means the planet won't warm as much, despite mankind's pumping CO2 into the atmosphere.

And as long as businessmen with a vested interest (Exxon / Mobil, Peabody Coal, power companies), and economists with a political bias (CEI, Heartland, Cato, Wall Street), and lawyers (Bachmann, Cornyn, Cantor) believe that they know more about global warming than climate scientists, nothing will get done to combat global warming.

Sept. 30, 10:04 a.m. Updated There's been a steady stream of distracting commentary here and elsewhere positing that carbon dioxide, the greenhouse gas at the heart of concerns about a growing and hard - to - reverse human influence on climate, is far more ephemeral than climate scientists assert.

While I guess that it's possible that right - wing genes somehow provide a better understanding of climate physics than climate scientists have, it seems more likely to me that a clash with political ideology inhibits a proper evaluation of scientific evidence.

High - energy particles driven through the laboratory ceiling by exploded stars far away in the Galaxy — the cosmic rays — liberate electrons in the air, which help the molecular clusters to form much faster than climate scientists have modeled in the atmosphere.

No less a figure than climate scientist, Professor Mike Hulme, founding director of the Tyndall Centre, joined the debate.

Fossil fuel corporations have five times more oil and coal and gas in known reserves than climate scientists think is safe to burn.

He's written extensively about the IFR on his site, more so than any climate scientist on the planet.

They conclude that uncertainties are larger than climate scientists have appreciated, and this conclusion is robust (according to them) to various methodological choices.

Real world science has to be a lot more reliable than climate scientist's careless guesses, presented as fact yet can never be proven laws by the very nature of the system being modelled, BTW, always hypotheses.

In other words, with more nitrogen available, plant life might be able to absorb more CO2 than climate scientists have been estimating, which means the planet won't warm as much, despite mankind's pumping CO2 into the atmosphere.

They claim our supplemental code was not usable, but in fact we provided a turnkey R script for every single figure in our submission — something not true of their code, so that is a little cheeky of them [as is declaring that one of us to be a mere blogger, rather than a climate scientist; — RRB --RSB-.

Extremes on both ends... who would've guessed it (other than climate scientists and those who listen to them)?

However, its long been apperent that while climate models and econ models have similar levels of scientific validity, economists are far more willing to talk about assumptions their models make, when and why those assumptions might or might not hold, etc., than climate scientists.

Worst Case Climate Change consists of negative changes not seen in everyday life, other than climate scientists, and therefore it is difficult, if not impossible, for ordinary people to understand the gravity of this situation.

And who knows more about the climate than the climate scientist?