If it's enough to get an open
world skeptic like me to enjoy it, fans of the genre will love it.
Not exact matches
With the
world converging in Paris later this year to hammer out a climate agreement, nuclear energy proponents
like China and
skeptics like Germany are keeping a close eye on France to see whether the French experiment will vindicate their approaches to energy.
That's a
world I'd
like to live in, but the
skeptic in me says, «nah»; rather, costs are being cut and companies are looking for ways to charge more for the same trite $ 10 - $ 20 box.
But their PNAS publication also referred to natural climate cycles, superimposed on the trend line,
like ENSO and solar variability, both of which have been net contributors to global cooling over 1998 - 2008 [so climate
skeptics can not — as they still do — point to either the Sun or El Niño to explain the
world's temperature graph over that period of time].
Climate
skeptics focused on scientific illiterates
like Al Gore and a recent graduate named Michael Mann, allowing real leaders of the climate movement,
like NAS President — Climatologist Ralph Cicerone — to continue directing federal research funds to support an unannounced 1945 social geo - engineering experiment to save themselves and the
world from possible nuclear annihilation.
Judging by the life expectancy of optimistic people vs pessimistic people, it looks
like the
skeptics will be around long enough to see whether the
world goes belly up or not.
Skeptics, write Hoffman, «argue that public funding of science in the post-Second
World War era through organizations
like the National Science Foundation (NSF) corrupted the scientific process.»
I'm close to where you are pokerguy but I think it's a false narrative to try to hold
skeptics, regardless of how inflamed their politics, to be judged in the same fashion as the IPCC who have the burden to actually «prove» the argument that is designed to support a massive real
world policy
like cap and trade.
For all practical purposes, the collective Greenpeace organization committed outright political suicide two weeks ago, essentially telegraphing to the entire
world that they never had the evidence they claimed they had, proving
skeptic climate scientists lie to the public under a pay - for - performance arrangement with fossil fuel industry people just
like the way shill experts lied for the tobacco industry.
Alarmists want to fight the war over whether the greenhouse gas effect of CO2 is true and whether the
world has seen warming over the last century, both propositions that
skeptics like myself accept.