Sentences with phrase «warming alarmists base»

RussiaGate — Even when global warming alarmists base claims on scientific measurements, they've often had their finger on the scale.

Not exact matches

... The global warming alarmists could not pursist without their endless use of fear, scare and dire predictions; most of which are based on faulty computer programs.

«The GHG «theory» based on CO2 is a thermodynamic impossibility» Yes, the climate alarmists peddle their pseudoscience claiming that the ghe works by transferring heat / thermal energy from the cold atmosphere to the warmer surface of the earth, more heat / thermal energy than is transferred by the Sun.

According to climate alarmists, the frequency and severity of this natural hazard should already be increasing in response to model - based predictions of CO2 - induced global warming.

The NY Times and Al Gore will not like this, but it is better to fight it out on the basis of the alarmists» invalid science rather than the moral wisdom of their alleged attempt to «save the world» from imaginary global warming / climate change due to human - caused CO2 emissions.

Well, ANU, snarky though you may be, you raise a nominally interesting point; the problem, however, is that the amounts are anomalies; so the 90's are on average a certain amount above the average of the base period; now to compare the increase in anomalies in the noughties, which are higher than the nineties and say this is evidence of progressive warming, hottest ever, or whatever is the current alarmist catch - cry, ignores the fact that the true measure of the warming is not the absolute anomalies but their difference; that is the amounts for the noughties should have the amounts for the nineties subtracted from them and then compared with the nineties after they have the eighties subtracted from them.

The criminal aspect is not only the failure of the alarmsits to observe these basic facts bu the Hockeystick fraud giving hundreds of times the weighting to faulty Bristlecone pine proxy data as to other sets in order to give a desired result, the blatant tampering of Data to warm the past with extremely dubious reasons, the NZ NWA scandal where they demonstrably altered data to fit the alarmist agenda, the Darwin Australia tampering, the crude attempt to prove a «hotspot» by making the base temperature representation red and thus appear hot in a now debunked graph etc Then there's the Nazi / Stalin / Lenin / Maoesque attempts to silence debate.

And so, over the decade, alarmist climate scientists tried to fool the public by stonewalling («it's the warmest decade on record,» which doesn't mean the decade was warming), denying the facts («the allegation that annual global mean temperatures stopped increasing during the past decade has no basis in reality»), or outright lying («the world is warming even more quickly than we had thought»).

To my mind, natural variability (including the role of clouds) is the big uncertainty especially as the alarmist case seems to be based on such a short period of warming.

Lilewise, alarmists will probably place strong reliance on physics based models demonstrating radiative warming by CO2.

Again proving that alarmist science is based on scientific untruths, speculation and hype, two new studies confirm what objective scientists have actually observed: recent past global warming is not causing an increase on severe storms.

Based on their track record of consistent falsehood and failure, the global warming alarmists have no credibility.

Recently, two science articles based on the latest research belies the notion, held by global warming alarmist proponents, that climate change is only a result of modern human CO2 emissions.

Then thereâ $ ™ s the pesky issue of â $ œconsensus.â $ Alarmists typically counter any fact - based global warming argument with the assertion that the UN Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has already ruled on the issue, and therefore â $ œthe science is settledâ $ and â $ œthe debate is over.â $ â $ œMild winter temperatures will decrease heavy snowstorms, â $ IPCC claimed in its 2001 Third Assessment.

Who among hot climatists will want to commit to writing a desire to collaborate in figuring out a way to discredit the more accurate satellite data that shows no global warming going on 2 decades in preference to greater reliance on the use of massaged land - based temperature records that support the global warming alarmists» meme that free enterprise capitalism is destroying the Earth?