Sentences with phrase «arguments against climate action»

Because you can very well accept that climate change exists and still find arguments against climate action because the costs of doing something are so great.

O'Leary acknowledged that there is a danger that the positive tone of this report could be misinterpreted to bolster arguments against climate action.

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.

Jon wrote a very interesting paper in which he argued that even if the skeptic narratives are correct, the old narratives I was telling wasn't an argument against climate action.

Not exact matches

In 2009 he said, when talking about climate change, that the «science is highly contentious, to say the least» and «the climate change argument is absolute crap», but did accept that precautionary action against it was a good idea.

Of the many inane arguments that are made against taking action on climate change, perhaps the most fatuous is that the projections climate models offer about the future are too uncertain to justify taking steps that might inconvenience us in the present.

Of the many inane arguments that are made against taking action on climate change, perhaps the most fatuous is that the projections climate models offer about the future are too uncertain to justify taking steps that might inconvenience us in the present.

Drawing on case studies of past environmental debates such as those over acid rain and ozone depletion, science policy experts Roger Pielke Jr. and Daniel Sarewitz argue that once next generation technologies are available that make meaningful action on climate change lower - cost, then much of the argument politically over scientific uncertainty is likely to diminish.26 Similarly, research by Yale University's Dan Kahan and colleagues suggest that building political consensus on climate change will depend heavily on advocates for action calling attention to a diverse mix of options, with some actions such as tax incentives for nuclear energy, government support for clean energy research, or actions to protect cities and communities against climate risks, more likely to gain support from both Democrats and Republicans.

With very few exceptions, the US press has utterly failed to cover climate change as an ethical and moral issue while focusing on the scientific and economic arguments against taking action that have been made by opponents of US climate change policies for almost 30 years.

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.

Again and again proponents of action on climate change have responded to economic arguments against taking action to reduce the threat of climate change by making counter economic arguments such as climate change policies will produce new jobs or reduce adverse economic impacts that will follow from the failure to reduce the threat of climate change.

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.

Uncertainty forms an integral part of climate science, and it is often cited in connection with arguments against mitigative action.

A recent study comparing arguments against climate science versus policy arguments against action on climate found that science denial is on the relative increase.

These groups gladly accept Exxon's support, which enables them to keep churning out misleading reports, to flood newspaper op - ed pages with bizarre arguments against action to curb rampant carbon emissions, and to appear on right - wing TV and radio where they're invited by the likes of Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck to tick off blatant distortions of climate science without challenge by actual climate experts.

This makes the arguments against taking actions against climate change not just wrong, but dangerous,» Dr. Gleick said in his written testimony.