Not exact matches
8) Excerpt from Peter Asmus book «Introduction to Energy in California» (
University of California Press, 2009): «Remember when people who spoke of cigarettes causing cancer were derided
as being
alarmist nuts?
As far as Reading University is concerned, it is a leading source of alarmist propaganda masquerading as scienc
As far
as Reading University is concerned, it is a leading source of alarmist propaganda masquerading as scienc
as Reading
University is concerned, it is a leading source of
alarmist propaganda masquerading
as scienc
as science.
You can be the biggest, most risible assclown in the history of junk statistics and pseudoscience but so long
as you can somehow cobble together a half - way plausible paper, no matter how inept your methodology, which helps prop up the vast man - made global warming industry then you have it made: the President of the USA will Tweet you; your
University will back you to the hilt; your colleagues will rally round you; you will get a very favourable write - up in the Guardian (and myriad other
alarmist publications); your critics will be sidelined and ignored.
Spectral considerations matter despite what idiots who ignore them argue with their ridiculous sums of radiative flux from the Sun and the Earth
as taught in
Universities and
alarmist sites.
As a recent study from the
University of Bristol documented, climate scientists have been so distracted and intimidated by the relentless campaign against them that they tend to avoid any statements that might get them labeled «
alarmists,» retreating into a world of charts and data.
Of course there's the scandal that just broke regarding the «gold standard of peer reviewed science» that climate
alarmists always reference, who's data is used
as the basis for many other climate studies,
as well
as IPCC reports, and even US EPA guidelines - The Climate Research Unit at the
University of East Anglia, UK.