Building an argument
against climate action upon a forceful claim about the most likely outcome of greenhouse gas emissions is to build an argument upon analytic sand.
Not exact matches
That is why Milieudefensie has called
upon Roger Cox, the lawyer who won the 2015
climate case
against the Dutch government, to demand that Shell takes
action.
For all of these reasons, arguments
against taking
action to reduce the threat of
climate change based
upon scientific uncertainty fail to pass minimum ethical scrutiny.
What distinguishes ethical issues from economic and scientific arguments about
climate change is that ethics is about duties, obligations, and responsibilities to others while economic and scientific arguments are usually understood to be about «value - neutral» «facts» which once established have usually been deployed in arguments
against action on
climate change based
upon self - interest.