Sentences with phrase «essentially different arguments»

It follows from this that to support the rightfulness of euthanasia with a number of essentially different arguments is to put oneself in the wrong from the outset by admitting indirectly that no single absolutely cogent argument exists.

Not exact matches

This, essentially, was the argument I had faced through three decades of work with Alex. He was not supposed to be able to name objects and categories, understand «bigger» and «smaller,» «same» and «different,» because his was a bird brain.

So essentially, I put the arguments of both sides «to the test», and arrived at the conclusion the theory is real, that the models have validity, that there is a need to consider what they mean, and what the tradeoffs are for different policy choices for mitigating it.

When so many different arguments support and no observations or plausible arguments speak against the understanding, it's natural that essentially every scientist of applicable specialization agrees that the theory of radiative energy transfer is correct including people like Lindzen and Spencer.

My own goal is to have readers (and maybe even but not necessarily Graeme) understand the invalidity of his argument asserting that (essentially) one sea level time series observation at one coastal location that (allegedly) doesn't show much change in several decades does not imply that the sea level changes have been the same at all other coastal locations (give or take 100 mm)- which implies that any observed variations exceeding this level in sea level rise at different locations around the world are «not real» and hence sea level rise due to global warming isn't anything to worry about.

So, essentially, he provides circular argument of anthropogenic garbage by referencing IPCC 2007 report, yet IPCC has stated they do not do science but put together different scenarios using grey literature, propaganda, news clipping, and the supposed science K.T. does.