Sentences with phrase «warmists say»

The famous slowdown that warmists say is due to the 1998 El Nino.

Monolithic group think science postures; warmists say they have the conclusive answers relative to «settled «(lobby fodder).

Warmists say it is getting warmer.

Related links: Earth's All Time Record High Temp Set in 1913 — Earth's All Time Record Low Set in 2010 & 2nd All Time Record Low Set in 2013 — «What would warmists say if the dates were reversed?»

Mann - made warmists say this does not disprove AGW, it is just a freak event temporarily hiding the undeniable, unprecedented, unrelenting global warming which is due to man burning fossil fuels and we need loads of nuclear NOW.

Earth's All Time Record High Temp Set in 1913 — Earth's All Time Record Low Set in 2010 & 2nd All Time Record Low Set in 2013 — «What would warmists say if the dates were reversed?»

What will the warmists say if the current trend of falling temperatures persists for another 5 to10 years?

Jim Cripwell September 22, 2013 at 8:05 am Reply What will the warmists say if the current trend of falling temperatures persists for another 5 to10 years?

Warmists say the expected warming is masked by the cooling.

In Australia, during a drought, we had the warmists saying the drought was caused by increased surface temperatures.

The warmists said that cooling was due to increasing CO2 reducing the energy flow from troposphere to stratosphere but I don't think either of us accept that.

Not exact matches

That said, I read the warmist blogs from time to time and a lot of them remind me of two erstwhile young men who knocked on my door some time ago to introduce themselves and their local house of worship.

Bill says he's got a paper in press about warming effects on lake life, so I suspect he does know a number of «peer - rev'd» similar studies — they may be warmists, but what matters is nailing any details of their evidence that shows bias etc..

Or you could believe the Warmists, and surround yourself with CO2, which should magically warm you up by 33C if you stand in direct sunlight, somewhat less if the surrounding air temperature is say, -85 C.

... the only thing ad hom attacks do is telegraph global warmists» intention to say something they know is deceiving.

Then, no sooner than having said that, the Warmists are waxing elegant about some imagined techno - Utopian future.

When the warmist - alarmists started trying to sell the CAGW story some time ago, did they say (in whatever year that was) that the world would have to wait for 30 years to see if the story was going to pan out, and to not worry about it in the meantime?

A noted «warmist» on Monday said scientists that believe the theory of global warming will «endorse Al Gore even though they know what he's saying is exaggerated and misleading.»

Mosher, if I understand him, keeps saying: the orthodox (I don't know if he would say «warmists») have an up - and - running theory, complete with models from super-computers, academic credentials, etc., and by the way: political decision - makers — the real powers that be — asked for all this, funded it, and got what they asked for.

Warmist Claim: «Derek Arndt, who heads the climate monitoring branch at NOAA's National Climatic Data Center in Asheville, N.C., said the new data should be viewed in the context of the record retreat of snow cover in the Northern Hemisphere at the end of the melt season...»

You, generic warmists, just keep saying it exists, but never show anything.

charles nelson says: August 14, 2011 at 1:18 am Absolutely excellent... an in - depth «exploded diagram» of an argument I have used to hush Warmists for many years now; I ask them if they've ever flown long haul and if they have ever looked at the in - flight display... the one that has a route map, arrival times etc... sometimes these have a temperature read out.

R Gates the skeptical warmist: «This really is exactly what Trenberth and others have been saying, though may may not so readily admit that at least 50 % of the 1976 - 1998 warming was because of natural ocean - atmsophere energy flux cycles.

Tom Friedman, warmist extraordinaire and a single digit golfer said as an aside to Trump «You wouldn't want Royal Aberdeen to be underwater.»

Only a warmist would say something like this without even knowing the facts.

I wouldn't be surprised if you perform the Warmist Wiggle, and say that Warmists aren't really trying to stop the climate from changing.

James Annan, of Frontier Research For Global Change, a prominent «warmist», recently said high estimates for climate sensitivity now look «increasingly untenable», with the true figure likely to be about half of the IPCC prediction in its last report in 2007.

When I say «friends,» I mean in a virtual sense, and use the term «friend» to tweak some folks (I'm wouldn't doubt that many of them wouldn't be friends with a socialist / eco - Nazi / true - believer / warmist / dissembling /» retarded» / pissant leftist such as myself).

There are no TV stations that give sceptics (always called «Deniers» by the TV) a chance of even saying what the problems are with the warmists beliefs, so people in Australia are pretty much screwed.

The Skeptical Warmist (aka R. Gates) October 8, 2012 at 11:26 said: You do realize that you refrigerator is little negentropy machine, with energy required to keep the heat from averaging out between the inside and outside of it.

The next thing, when the atmospheric change in CO2 declines due to the upcoming cooling, warmists wil say that the scenario C is the right one, because the forcings decrased.

You go on and on about CO2 storage heat, which is actually is quite similar to CO2 is TRAPPING heat which warmists, media and ecoloonies say many times.

I could imagine a Warmist Cult believer, like you, might say «follow the Religion of Climate Science» and «the end is near!

That is an admission that models need a large «fudge factor» in order for warmists to say, «I told you so».

But I will say that I find it very curious that you'd defend such analogizing, yet apparently be so «offended» that «warmists» would compare «climate change deniers» to holocaust deniers.

The repeated use of the term «undeniable» by bloggers and activists commenting on the report is merely the latest attempt by the warmists to claim that there's nothing more to be said about climate policy — that the debate is over.

The fact is that warmists deliberately say «carbon» because of the images it conjures in people's minds.

Warmists focus pretty much exclusively on the negative impacts of fossil fuels and I would say they greatly exaggerate them, while completely ignoring or discounting the positive impacts fossil fuels have made.

While Peter Theil makes a valid point about warmists refusing to debate, you can tell he's not paying a great deal of attention to the subject when he says:» The hockey stick that Al Gore predicted in the early 2000s on the climate has not happened.»

But to proceed to depend on handwaving and specious nonsense about the simplicity of energy balance calculations, demonstrates the Warmist disconnect from reality better than anything I could say.

So, to the «Warmists» I say, it's -20 c here right now and will be for the next week or so.

This is bog - standard, traditional well known tried and tested and used in industries everyday knowledge physics, that's how weather systems work — you «warmists» who say that carbon dioxide warms the Earth are spouting junk physics, you're describing an imaginary world, not this one.

Even worse for the Warmist Faith, to achieve «dangerous» warming of, say, 2.4 c + will require CO2 levels at 1600 - 3200 ppm.

McIntyre has said for years that there aren't enough proxy records — the more the better, yet warmists show relatively little interest.

He knows that he is safe, because if the Fake Skeptics say: Warmist don't have even 0,0000000000001 % of the data ESSENTIAL, for knowing what is the temp; would have exposed that:» their lies about past phony GLOBAL warmings have even less data».

I remember when the warmists tried to deny the Little Ice Age, claiming the data was «minimal» or «misinterpreted» or some such, as deniers always say.

Saying the release of the dossier was timed to coincide with Copenhagen allows warmers to imply that Copenhagen was more than what it actually was, i.e. a junket for warmist illuminati that accomplished nothing.

Can you imagine the Warmist B / S distributors, or the Fakes apologizing for every lie they say - they wouldn't have any time left for taking breath.

So says perhaps the world's greatest living theoretical physicist Professor Freeman Dyson in a truly glorious exchange with the fervently warmist newspaper's fervently warmist science editor Steve Connor.

When I criticize Anthony's views, both in posts and in comments, he never writes to me and says «warmists will have a field day.»