Global
warming deniers often claim that bias prevents them from publishing in peer - reviewed journals.
Not exact matches
I've noticed this consistently: papers
denying global
warming *
often * have fundamental errors in data analysis.
A feature of [the global
warming] controversy is that those that
deny there is a problem
often seem to have political or ideological views that lead them to be unhappy with the actions that would be necessary should global
warming be due to human activity.
«
deny there is a problem
often seem to have political or ideological views that lead them to be unhappy with the actions that would be necessary should global
warming be due to human activity»
Christy's opening statement was a
often - used climate
denier myth: «As the global temperature failed to
warm over the past 15 years...» [24]
To quash the notion that no valid scientific criticism exists against the idea of man - caused global
warming, enviro - activists
often say «
denier scientists» are paid by the fossil fuel industry to lie about the issue, insinuating a parallel to expert «shills» who did the same for «big tobacco».
As someone who won't accept the global
warming mantra I can
often be discouraged by the persistent abuse, be it in the small form «science -
denier» or the worse «Big oil shill» and up to «you are killing our grandchildren» but I keep heart that the observation will continue to diverge from the prediction and someone will eventually shout loud enough... «but he's not wearing any clothes».
A feature of this controversy is that those that
deny there is a problem
often seem to have political or ideological views that lead them to be unhappy with the actions that would be necessary should global
warming be due to human activity.
It is
often the case that the old
warmer /
denier categories split people who agree with each other on a certain issue.
A feature of this controversy is that those who
deny that there is a problem
often seem to have political or ideological views that lead them to be unhappy with the actions that would be necessary if global
warming were due to human activity.
Weakening Solar Output Won't Slow
Warming Over Next Century One argument often cited by climate skeptics and global warming deniers is that solar cycles are responsible for at least part of the warming we're seei
Warming Over Next Century One argument
often cited by climate skeptics and global
warming deniers is that solar cycles are responsible for at least part of the warming we're seei
warming deniers is that solar cycles are responsible for at least part of the
warming we're seei
warming we're seeing now.
One more comment on Figure 9.1
Deniers have
often called attention to a comparison of solar
warming (a) with greenhouse gas
warming (c), claiming that the «tropospheric hot spot» is a fingerprint specifically of the greenhouse forcing, since (according to them) «the models clearly point that out».
We've mentioned it
often: The main goal is to make solar cost - competitive with fossil fuels so that there are no excuses even for the most ardent global
warming deniers.
Climate change
deniers often express that conditions were far
warmer in the past.