Sentences with phrase «with global warming skeptics»

Writing in the Washington Post, Sheldon Whitehouse, a Democratic Senator from Rhode Island, offered a curious suggestion for dealing with global warming skeptics:

Director James Cameron Unleashed: Calls for gun fight with global warming skeptics: «I want to call those deniers out into the street at high noon and shoot it out with those boneheads»

Tuesday night's presidential debate surprisingly united global warming alarmists with global warming skeptics.

See: Director James Cameron Unleashed: Calls for gun fight with global warming skeptics: «I want to call those deniers out into the street at high noon and shoot it out with those boneheads»)

«Conversation with global warming skeptic Anthony Watts,» YouTube video uploaded by user «PBS NEwsHour,» September 17, 2012.

Approximately six months after the Daily Climate blast at Spencer, Gleick impersonated a board member of the Heartland Institute, a libertarian Chicago think tank with global warming skeptic tendencies.

Ofcom found that Channel 4 broke impartiality guidelines and the film misrepresented statements by former British government scientist David King, in a scene with global warming skeptic Fred Singer.

Not exact matches

The meeting coincides with a gathering of climate change skeptics in New York City, who are debating topics like «Global warming: Was it ever a crisis?»

The only real hoax here is that van der Linden is throwing global warming skeptics under the bus with conspiracy theorists who believe that nasa faked the moon landing, the government holds aliens hostage in Area 51, and the Boston Marathon bombings were an inside job.

CLIMATE SKEPTIC: a person who has not yet been convinced anthropogenic global warming is happening, but is open to being convinced if presented with the evidence.

Soon is a leading skeptic of the widely accepted science surrounding climate change, In the International Journal of Public Opinion Research, a study titled «The Structure of Scientific Opinion on Climate Change» found that 97 percent of scientists surveyed believed global warming already is ongoing, with 84 percent of scientists surveyed believing human - produced greenhouse gases were the driving force behind the change.

This aspect of their work is rarely if ever mentioned by the authors themselves, and still less in citations of the work in skeptics» tracts such as that distributed with the «Global Warming Petition Project.»

Now, there's nothing wrong with making mistakes when pursuing an innovative observational method, but Spencer and Christy sat by for most of a decade allowing — indeed encouraging — the use of their data set as an icon for global warming skeptics.

The skeptics» press, especially as echoed in Crichton's State of Fear states that the Kilimanjaro retreat can have nothing to do with anthropogenic global warming, because it began in the 1880's, before any appreciable CO2 response is expected.

CLIMATE SKEPTIC: a person who has not yet been convinced anthropogenic global warming is happening, but is open to being convinced if presented with the evidence.

I felt that he is global warming skeptic or denier to read his article but it was not related with global warming issue and I felt his article is difficult to understand because English is my foreign languge, I give up others of him.

This is contributing to all of us going down the tubes together as a result of global warming skeptics and deniers who are playing around with the well known casino rule of «gambler's ruin» by always betting against the house.

Skeptics have long cited Doran's research to show that global warming is a flawed theory motivated by alarmist scientists more interested in scaring up huge research grants than in pursuing the evidence with honesty and integrity.

This aspect of their work is rarely if ever mentioned by the authors themselves, and still less in citations of the work in skeptics» tracts such as that distributed with the «Global Warming Petition Project.»

Given that skeptics, taken as a whole, put forward a nearly infinite variety of often conflicting and contradictory beliefs regarding global warming and climate science, exactly what is a climate scientist supposed to agree with?

For years, skeptics have filled comments with dismissive views of climate science to sow doubts about the consensus that fossil fuels are responsible for global warming — dominating that space, according to the group.

My interest in climate change began innocently enough --- some «vigorous discussions» with a few in - law family members who happened to be staunch global warming skeptics.

Failing to stop a so - called global warming crisis which has increasing credibility problems with its underlying science assessments, or breaking the 9th Commandment in order to be sure [skeptic] scientists» criticisms aren't taken seriously?

The associations I point to among the man - caused global warming promoters is really just a secondary problem, with the relevance being simply to amplify the core problem: nobody corroborates the corruption accusation against skeptic scientists, and it has been devoid of evidence to prove it true from its inception.

Yes, the notion that scientists tow the global warming line in exchange for fame and money seems to ignore the many benefits of being a published climate scientist who tows the «skeptic» line, or even seems to sympathize with some of their talking points — who are valuable, as market theory would predict, because they are very scarce.

A sledgehammer message if there ever was one: Nasty, greedy billionaire industrialists who hatched a plan to pay skeptic scientists associated with think tanks to lie to the public, and the hard evidence is that sinister - sounding «reposition global warming» phrase.

For promoters of man - caused global warming, they've put all their faith into assuming skeptics» associations with the fossil fuel industry — however tenuous — renders the skeptics untrustworthy.

As I've said on several occasions here and elsewhere, the major problem with global warming believers» enslavement to the «reposition global warming as theory rather than fact» phrase is that it is not in any way proof of an arrangement between between skeptics and industry officials involving payments made for false climate assessments.

And wouldn't those talking points pack a fatal punch with reporters if you could say a Pulitzer winning investigative reporter discovered a leaked coal industry memo which was proof for skeptic climate scientists being paid to «reposition global warming as theory rather than fact.»

While I was aware of myriad problems with the «fictional names» narrative in 2010, I was not aware of the Ofcom complaint until skeptic climate scientist Dr S. Fred Singer had emailed the producer of «The Great Global Warming Swindle» in February 2011 (cc» ing my email address among several others, since he was well aware of my work).

When «Climategate» first broke, I noted the skeptic preoccupation with one tiny piece of climate science while neglecting the full weight of direct observations of current global warming.

Perry defiantly insisted that carbon dioxide is not a main driver of global warming and pushed for a RT / BT process, asking, «What's wrong with being a skeptic?»

As ever, the fatal problem with enviro - activists» enslavement to the «reposition global warming as theory» phrase as proof that skeptics are paid illicit money to lie about certainty of global warming is that there is no evidence of it being a top - down fossil fuel industry directive of any kind.

A professor who is accusing global warming skeptics of engaging in tabloid - style character assassination of scientists, called an American climate skeptic â $ œan assh * leâ $ on the December 4, 2009 live broadcast of BBC's Newsnight program. â $ œWhat an assh * le!â $ declared Professor Watson at the end of the contentious debate with Climate Depot's executive editor Marc Morano.

Global warming believers need only to counter dry recitations of skeptic science material with assertions about the numbers of «IPCC scientists», declare this to be the settled consensus opinion, then claim there is leaked memo evidence proving skeptics are paid industry money to «reposition global warming as theory rather than fact» — hoodwink the public, in other Global warming believers need only to counter dry recitations of skeptic science material with assertions about the numbers of «IPCC scientists», declare this to be the settled consensus opinion, then claim there is leaked memo evidence proving skeptics are paid industry money to «reposition global warming as theory rather than fact» — hoodwink the public, in other global warming as theory rather than fact» — hoodwink the public, in other words.

That pretty much is how skeptics feel when trying to have an intelligent conversation with global warming alarmist — especially when they can not even admit Mann's hockey stick is political and more social than science.

«These papers should lay to rest once and for all the claims by John Christy and other global warming skeptics that a disagreement between tropospheric and surface temperature trends means that there are problems with surface temperature records or with climate models,» said Alan Robock, a meteorologist at Rutgers University.

Frederick Seitz, another prominent skeptic on global warming, is involved with two other groups mentioned in the plan: the George C. Marshall Institute, where Dr. Seitz is chairman, and the Advancement of Sound Science Coalition, where he is on the science advisory board.

That doesn't seem like it will solve this mainly because the «skeptics» left now are too self - invested and self - identifying with their view to be swayed by anything including a resumption of global warming and continued melting.

I'm always debating with my friend who is a skeptic about global warming.

Your fellow skeptics could help strengthen the case for global warming by agreeing with you.

Skeptics of Western global warming are really aware of obvious mistakes that fall within their particular areas of expertise and most skeptics take issue with the picture of impending calamity that global warming fearmongers always try tSkeptics of Western global warming are really aware of obvious mistakes that fall within their particular areas of expertise and most skeptics take issue with the picture of impending calamity that global warming fearmongers always try tskeptics take issue with the picture of impending calamity that global warming fearmongers always try to paint.

VP: Your fellow skeptics could help strengthen the case for global warming by agreeing with you.

Others discussed how to deal with skeptics, some displaying a hostility to contrarians that seemed surprising to people who haven't followed the growing nastiness of the fight against global - warming science, which has come to resemble the fights over abortion and evolution.

Any association of anything remotely connected with the fossil fuel industry automatically invalidates any criticism a skeptic scientist might offer to the idea of man - caused global warming.

However, Kelly Sims Gallagher is not merely a coincidentally handy local Tufts University professor, she has direct connections with the same set of leaked industry memo phrases seen within the growing numbers of California global warming lawsuits — the «reposition global warming as theory rather than fact» strategy phrase and the «older, less - educated males» / «younger, lower - income women» targeting phrases — which are widely repeated elsewhere as proof that the fossil fuel industry «pays skeptic climate scientists to participate in misinformation campaigns» undermining the certainty of catastrophic man - caused global warming (despite those memos being worthless as evidence, but that is another matter).

Dig deep enough in the «crooked skeptics» accusation, and you ultimately discover that in regard to the notion about skeptics being in a pay - for - performance arrangement with anybody in the fossil fuel industry, there's only one usable weapon in the enviro - activists» arsenal to indict those skeptics as industry - paid shills: the supposedly leaked industry memo set from a public relations campaign called the «Information Council for the Environment» (ICE) supposedly containing the «reposition global warming» strategy goal, which targeted «older, less - educated males» and «younger, lower - income women.»

Although the emails don't show a response from Gehri, an industry executive with a long track record of working behind the scenes to downplay the significance of global warming, they do show Soon sharing a collegial familiarity with industry executives, media skeptics and organizations dedicated to undermining prevailing climate science.

The March 23, 2008, interview with Singer, on March 23, «World News» dubbed «The Skeptic,» began with Harris asking «Why, despite all the evidence, does this scientist still argue that global warming is a hoax?»

In 2010, Liu and Curry (that's climate «skeptic» Judith Curry) arrived at the same conclusions as the Manabe and Zwally papers, but predicted that global warming will eventually catch up with Antarctic sea ice and cause it to decline over the second half of the 21st century.