Sentences with phrase «what alarmist climate scientists»

At least, this is what alarmist climate scientists like Hansen want the public to believe.

Not exact matches

Paul D... As a part - time alarmist I would answer that with a little bit of extrapolation added to some warnings of climate scientists I guess the worst case scenario at least includes the total collapse of the WAIS, creating tsunamis at least all over the Pacific rim, the subsequent sea level rise of c. 7m will destroy most of the remaining harbours, communication centers near coasts, next up would be the melting of the collapsed ice in the southern ocean altering the climate of the entire southern hemisphere, making it near - impossible to guess what areas are good for similar agriculture as before, leading to massive movements of people.

Government has an obvious and huge vested intrest in alarmist conclusions, and its climate scientists don't seem to even know what integrity IS, let alone be committed to it.

What common sense tells us, Fan...... is that despite the growing disparity between models and what robust measuremrents we do have, the overwhelming majority of government - funded climate scientists endorse the alarmist worldview tells because that is what benefits their paymaster and ideological ageWhat common sense tells us, Fan...... is that despite the growing disparity between models and what robust measuremrents we do have, the overwhelming majority of government - funded climate scientists endorse the alarmist worldview tells because that is what benefits their paymaster and ideological agewhat robust measuremrents we do have, the overwhelming majority of government - funded climate scientists endorse the alarmist worldview tells because that is what benefits their paymaster and ideological agewhat benefits their paymaster and ideological agenda.

What needs explaining is not who discovered what — the scientists or the «deniers» — but how alarmist claims about climate change always seem to precede the evidence, such that researchers believe the negative picture before the science has delivered a verdWhat needs explaining is not who discovered what — the scientists or the «deniers» — but how alarmist claims about climate change always seem to precede the evidence, such that researchers believe the negative picture before the science has delivered a verdwhat — the scientists or the «deniers» — but how alarmist claims about climate change always seem to precede the evidence, such that researchers believe the negative picture before the science has delivered a verdict.

The climate will eventually warm again — «stable» climate is an alarmist myth — and alarmist climate scientists will no doubt beat their doomsday drums even harder, while continuing to exaggerate the facts in what they tell the public to win support for the CAGW hypothesis.

The plan by climate alarmists to have other scientists imprisoned for their «global warming» skepticism is backfiring horribly, and the chief alarmist is now facing a House investigation into what has been called «the largest science scandal in US history.»

I note Gavin refers to non-climate scientists who challenge the AGW alarmists as «citizen scientists» perhaps he should consider the climate scientist who are doing data analysis as «citizen data analysts» because frankly from what I've read on these pages they seem to be a pretty amateurist bunch.

''... real scientists engaged in real research have used sound statistical methods to investigate this topic; and what they typically find does not bode well for climate alarmists... performed a series of statistical analyses on these data, seeking to determine «whether the data set can reveal the degree to which islands in the Pacific are already seeing the impact of global climate change on the risk of severe flooding.»

It is not possible to calculate the effect of anthropogenic CO2 until we know within closer limits what the natural variation is.For example if you look at the ice core data for the Holocene and if you believe that CO2 is the climate driver you would have to conclude that on a scale of thousands of years CO2 was an Ice House — not a green house gas.For the data and an estimate of the coming cooling for the next few hundred years check the post» Climate Forecasting for Britain's Seven Alarmist Scientists and for UK Politicians.climate driver you would have to conclude that on a scale of thousands of years CO2 was an Ice House — not a green house gas.For the data and an estimate of the coming cooling for the next few hundred years check the post» Climate Forecasting for Britain's Seven Alarmist Scientists and for UK Politicians.Climate Forecasting for Britain's Seven Alarmist Scientists and for UK Politicians.»

As more and more scientists defect from the crumbling alarmist bandwagon, however, critics say the hysterical shrieking and dangerous rhetoric from politicians only serve to further illustrate the accelerating collapse of what many climate experts refer to as the «global - warming hoax.»