The Green attack on genetically improved crops is deeply unscientific and hurts the environment, the poor and everyone.
Many research results published in scientific journals shouldn’t be trusted.
Don't confuse speculative conclusions drawn about climate science with the science itself.
I wondered "How many skeptical videos are there?" and set out to find out.
A new lesson set called the Climate Change IQ (CCIQ) provides a good skeptical critique of ten top alarmist claims.
These reports are supposedly summarizing the existing scientific literature, but in reality the merely choose and use scholarly citations to support the one-sided argument for alarmism.
CFACT policy advisor Larry Bell lauds the first steps taken by the Trump Administration to restore NASA to its primary mission -- and encourages that the agency needs to press on with a mission to Mars.
CO2Science has one of the largest collections of sound science material on the Web.
CFACT science and policy advisor H. Sterling Burnett of the Heartland Institute reports that the EPA (and other federal agencies) skew the real cost-benefit numbers in promoting massive regulations. One example: While the Obama Clean Power Plan might have saved 21,000 lives (as the EPA claimed), the rules would also also resulted in from 102,500 to 164,000 early deaths. The HONEST Act hopes to correct these discrepancies.
One of the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) longest and most successful air pollution standards is based on a taxpayer-funded study plagued by “data fabrication and falsification,” according to a veteran toxicologist.
Can the global warming campaign keep scaring us if their predictions never come true?
Given the pressures, it is impressive that teachers want to teach the entire climate debate.
West Virginia University professor James E. Smith argues that, without a basic understanding of the scientific process that has been so successful and useful in getting us to this point in our collective histories, we can hardly expect to see a better future if similar men and women are not at the helm. Maybe a little less pandering and a lot more proper decision-making based on scientific facts will make the governance process more attractive to professionals for whom a future legacy of successful advancements is a valued outcome – and thus better for our future.
Global warming is based on global statistics that have little credibility.
Archaeologists make discoveries, present their evidence, engage in discussions and debates that can continue for years, and try to defend their conclusions. Paying attention climate campaigners?