Word: cases
(lookup in dictionary)
(lookup stats)
Dates: all
Sort By: most recent first
(reverse)
...mails weaken the scientific case for global warming? Put it this way: when it comes to climate-science analysis from the representative of the world's biggest oil-producing state, it's wise to be suspicious. In the weeks since the e-mails first became public, many climate scientists and policy experts have looked through them, and they report that the correspondence does not contradict the overwhelming scientific consensus on global warming, which has been decades in the making. "The content of the stolen e-mails has no impact whatsoever on our overall understanding that human activity is driving dangerous...
...have the e-mails been interpreted? To global-warming doubters, the CRU e-mails are the new Pentagon Papers, proof that the powers that be - in this case, international climate scientists - are engaged in outright fraud and were exposed only by a brave whistle-blower. (See pictures of a glacier melting in Peru...
Many skeptics argue that the case for man-made global warming has been essentially undone, and that before the world goes any further in considering action to control greenhouse-gas emissions, all scientific evidence for warming must be reevaluated. Jones' e-mail about Mann's "trick" appears to indicate that climate researchers have been actively manipulating scientific data to better fit their models on climate change, while other e-mails seemingly confirm what skeptics had long suspected - that the globe in recent years wasn't warming as fast as theories on climate change had assumed. Most of all, the tone...
...Will the controversy derail efforts to curb warming? Although the e-mails have no bearing on the scientific case for climate change, they'll likely have a major political impact. At the very moment when countries around the world - including the U.S. - seem poised, finally, to begin to control greenhouse-gas emissions, the controversy created by the e-mails allows skeptics to roll some of the momentum back, at least by injecting doubt among a confused public. (Facebook users, comment on this story below...
...climate scientists cannot be expected to debate with a skeptical monolith. While the largely conservative doubters of man-made climate change are a small minority, they remain immovable. What scientists view as healthy debate, critics tend to see as evidence that the scientific case is still open - and the American public, large portions of which are all but scientifically illiterate, are not equipped to make the distinction...