Rather, I am reluctant to concede «CAGW» is a problem given
the lack of alternative explanations of observations, use of scareware, consequences of «Climate Change» policy, denigration of and retaliation on skeptics, and so on and so forth.
You believe the cause of recent warming to be the increase in man made AC02 emissions, that's fine, but if you want me to believe your theory too then show me the evidence, don't show
me your lack of an alternative explanation and call it evidence or berate me for not showing you evidence to the contrary.
Not exact matches
But, on the other hand, it is quite unjustified for theists to hold that we must tolerate or swallow the paradoxes or explain them away (by feats
of ingenuity so subtle, and verbal methods so remote from intuitive insight or definite logical structures, that only deity could know with any assurance what was taking place), giving as justification the claim that the
alternative position
of atheism is even more paradoxical (
lacking, it may be urged, any principle
of cosmic
explanation at all).
There are several
alternative explanations to this «
lack»
of anti-inflammatory effect (I'd have liked to see the concentrations
of other inflammatory markers such as CRP, directly linked to the risk
of developing cardiovascular disease).
Our
explanation for the
lack of warming can be evaluated against
alternative hypotheses.
Due to the
lack of a good
explanation for this onset
of cooling, an objective scientist should select the fully formed theory A as more plausible unless good evidence was forthcoming for the
alternative half - theory B. Hansen,
of course, already knows that CO2 sensitivity is high because the heating half - cycle
of the paleo data tells him so.
Lacking a time machine, the only possible
alternative explanation that is consistent with the IPCC position is that the ~ 9 month lag
of CO2 behind ST, LT and dCO2 / dt is a positive feedback mechanism, and a minor one.
Physical Symptoms: Judges attach little significance to isolated physical symptoms
of impairment given the
lack of their scientific relationship to impairment, the police officer's unfamiliarity with the accused's usual demeanour, and
alternative explanations for the symptoms.