Not exact matches
My argument here is that
if alarmism works at a broad level (climate research funding for global
warming) for getting funds, it should also work at the finer scale (within climate research).
If you are wrong about humans causing catastrophic global
warming, will you give all the money you «earned» from your
alarmism back?
I wonder... where would the country would be today
if the Western science of global
warming alarmism existed in the 1800s and managed to derail the critical role of trains — replacing canals as a primary mode of transportation — in the growth of America?
Global
warming alarmism is turned on its head and the supposed role of carbon dioxide in climate change may be wrong,
if the latest evidence from Japan's scientists is to be believed.