Sentences with phrase «warming alarmists who»

-LSB-...] No Tricks Zone, another instance of fraud perpetrated by global warming alarmists who have charge of data.

The Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change has been vigorously attacked by some environmentalists and global warming alarmists who view it as a threat to their claim of a «consensus» in favor of their extreme views.

Michael Crichton had a big problem with these global warming alarmists who don't really seem to like people much, whether at home or around the globe — e.g.,

Not exact matches

Scientists and others who hope to inform the public or spur action have long struggled with how to convey the high stakes of global warming without making people feel helpless or fueling deniers by coming across as alarmist.

Peter, being an alarmist is a responsible role for any who see, experience, suffer from, research or educate themselves about the direct impacts of a warming world.

However, when people use the term «catastrophic anthropogenic global warming» they are not referring to any real science but are attempting to paint anyone who talks about the science as an alarmist.

Then it ends by quoting Winston Churchill in a way that's meant to group the furthest - out global - warming alarmist with the likes of RC and other responsible scientists: «A fanatic is one who can't change his mind and won't change the subject.»

In a column titled «In 2008, a 100 Percent Chance of Alarm,» he exposes the Chicken Littles for what they are — opportunists and alarmists who in this new year «will bring you image after frightening image of natural havoc linked to global warming.»

However keen you may be to demonstrate my arguments are misleading, I am afraid to report I am simply a scientist who feels stongly about protecting our natural environment, and who agrees global warming is a potential risk, but yet who remains unconvinced by the generally alarmist claims that the end of the world is nigh.

So I take it that the consensus view is that according to our best current scientific understanding, there is no possibility whatsoever of any catastrophic consequences of anthropogenic global warming; therefore to use the word «catastrophic» is irresponsible alarmism;, and therefore the deniers are actually quite right to accuse anyone who suggests that such outcomes are possible of being an irresponsible alarmist.

He withdrew any kind of bipartisan support for an ETS (and more)» «two years ago Canadians gave majority government to Stephen Harper's Conservatives, who were pledged to a sensible use of its resources, so Australians have now elected a government with a pragmatic attitude on global warming» «Led by Christiana Figueres, Executive Secretary of the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change, an attempt was made, by what can only be described as alarmists, to exploit these fires for the purposes of the global warming debate.

Clearly, nature itself was pumping much more CO2 into the atmosphere than evil humans who are constantly vilified by the hysterical global warming alarmists.

The worst outcome for gobal warming alarmists like Chad Blair who deal in blatant lies, to push their agenda, is being guilty of an excess of virtue.

IMO, global warming alarmists (as well as GMO and nuclear alarmists) are a subset of people who either haven't looked at the issue because they assume someone else has, or haven't scrutinized it because they don't want it scrutinized.

In other words, «Forecast the Facts» was originally conceived as a front group controlled by far - left advocacy groups to hide behind while attacking meteorologists, who surveys show tend to be very skeptical of the claims of global warming alarmists.

The Austrian meteorologist Dominik Jung found the same winter cooling throughout the Alps, which should comfort the managers of the various sky resorts who have been continuously told by the climate alarmists that sky resorts have no future due to climate warming.

Until then, count me among the skeptics who consider this a political rather than scientific issue, especially in light of the fact that it is believed that the Antarctic and arctic shelves are breaking from stress (from «overgrowth»), not due to heat, since they are larger than they have been during recorded history, and that when the alarmists are proven conclusively to be wrong, they change the terminology («global cooling» to «global warming» to «global climate change» - face it, the global climate always has been and always will be very dynamic).

Since the beginning of this «warmest year» and» warmest decade» meme about four or five years ago, it has been a hallmark argument for an alarmist who thinks skeptics are stupid, and for an alarmist who can't recognize the implicit recognition of the pause within.

«Since its creation in 2006 the site has done nothing but post poorly researched propaganda with a clear intent to smear respected scientists, policy analysts or groups who dare oppose an alarmist position on global warming.

Global warming alarmists (many of them the same who predicted a New Ice Age in the 1970s) ignore, or evade, such awkward facts as the greatly increased CO2 production worldwide for 30 years after 1941, when heavy industry increased immensely for armaments in WWII, and for rebuilding and consumer goods like cars in the postwar boom in the Americas, Europe and Asia — while global temperatures simultaneously fell.

Neil also cites Hans von Storch, who believes that climate change has been «oversold», and talks of «alarmists», and Roy Spencer, a signatory to the Evangelical Declaration on Global Warming.

To be charitable (and to overlook all the cherry - picking and decline - hiding), the turn - of - the - century climate alarmists who failed to foresee the current 17 - year warming pause might reasonably plead that it was an «unknown unknown» - something they didn't know they didn't know.

He is one who celebrates when the recent climate data show the alarmist's predictions of catastrophic warming might be wrong.

The National Center for Science Education has adopted as part of its mission the task of attacking researchers and commentators who question the biased and alarmist position on global warming staked out by the Obama administration and environmental advocacy groups, so Steven Newton's highly critical essay comes as no surprise.

I could only laugh as ridiculous CO2 alarmists who metamorphosed a local disaster, brought about by ignorance of natural coastal changes, into a global warming «crystal ball».

Isn't it the CAGW alarmists who are projecting catastrophic consequences of global warming?

Like many other conference speakers and attendees, Secretary - General Ban cited the recent droughts, floods, and Tropical Storm Sandy as proof of the dire consequences of man - made global warming, even though many studies and scientists (including scientists who usually fall into the climate alarmist category) have stated that there is no evidence to support claims that «extreme weather» has been increasing in frequency and / or magnitude in recent years, or that extreme events (hurricanes, droughts, heat waves, etc.) have anything to do with increased CO2 levels.

But yet the language of the global warming alarmist, is to accuse anyone who does not believe in man - made climate change as a «denier», a heretic, a blasphemer.

He and his coconspirators are so desperate to discredit anyone who disagrees with their alarmist views on man - made global warming that they are willing to lie, steal, and even defraud their own friends and allies in the media.»

Please, provide a plot of the number of scientists who dare speak against global warming alarmists vs. year, with the source.

As has been the case with other attempts to vilify, intimidate and silence experts who disagree with alarmist views on global warming and climate change, Kaine presented an argument rife with logical fallacies — appeals to emotion, straw men, ridicule, oversimplification and misrepresentation.

Those who believe that global warming is a natural process, and that anyone who disagrees is a «climate alarmist» or «climate activist», and probably in the pay of the green energy industry

Skeptics have long been pointing out that some of the same alarmists who are now warning of the Earth's warming were some 30 years ago warning of cooling temperatures and a coming ice age.

Dr. Hulme and others avoid sounding alarmist, but offer scant comfort to anyone who doubts that humans are contributing to warming or believes the matter can be deferred.

This is what happens when you send people from liberal Brown University, who conveniently come up with another scare - a-rama about global warming, in what appears to be another feeble «alarmist» attempt to counter climategate and all the other «gates» since.

I call it the «T3» tax, and I think the proposal should make everyone happy, except the most extreme alarmists and the Trojan horse - types who see the global warming issue as a vehicle for imposing a set of anti-growth policies that they would want even if global warming fizzles as a pretext.

2) In spite of the title of this email, I'm well aware — as are those who read this blog — that global warming alarmists have been exposed as fearmongering chicken little liars (not to mention hypocrites) for decades, but rarely has it been on a level where you actually have «scientists» and their associates caught on paper attempting to suppress data that is contra to their pre-desired result.

The top French weatherman who was sacked from his state broadcaster for speaking inconvenient truths about the non-existence of «man - made - global - warming» has taken exquisite revenge on the alarmist establishment: now he's got a new job broadcasting from the Kremlin's propaganda arm, pouring

Then, in keeping with the global warming alarmist playbook, they suggested I disclose who my funders are.

Like so many alarmists, any climate scientist who has suggested CO2 warming has been detrimental to wildlife becomes «Precious» to Miesler.

There was the keynote address by Sir Robert Watson, who explored the implications of our current emissions path, and the fact that we are likely heading for a world that is 4 or 5 degrees warmer by 2100 than it was before industrialisation, with consequences that are alarming rather than alarmist.

Disagree Brandon, getting everyone to agree humans have caused around half of the warming was a coup for the alarmists, because we have no idea whatsoever who has created what warming

Unfortunately NOAA / NASA had and to some extent still have political boss (es) who maybe also global warming alarmists.

I suggest that our track record to date is infinitely superior to that of the global warming alarmists including the IPCC, who have been wrong in all their very - scary predictions.

Levi, who is the CFR's top guru on climate change, is surely aware by now of the overwhelming evidence, including admissions by some of the top alarmists, that there has been no measurable global warming for the past 16 years, all of the media horror stories and Al Gore pronouncements about impending Climate Armageddon notwithstanding.

Global warming «skeptics» — scientists and others who question whether the scientific debate is truly settled and ask for real data to support the claims of the alarmists — are frequently attacked in the press, by politicians (including President Barack Obama), and on countless blogs and Web sites.

Andrew Bolt in Australia has a similar fair question, which seems to be nearly impossible for the Australian alarmists who created the New Zealdn warming trend to answer:

Kim Dabelstein Petersen is a Wikipedia «editor» who seems to devote a large part of his life to editing reams and reams of Wikipedia pages to pump the assertions of global - warming alarmists and deprecate or make disappear the arguments of skeptics.

Speaking to Andrew Bolt on Sky News» The Bolt Report, Professor Ridd says you can't trust alarmist scientists who claim the Great Barrier Reef is dying, thanks to man - made warming.

It was more than just luck though: the global warming alarmists in Congress who had called Hansen scheduled him to testify during the heat wave and turned the air conditioning off that day.