Sentences with phrase «lukewarmer position»

He also goes on to lament something that is very familiar to me — there is a strong argument for the lukewarmer position, but the media will not even achnowledge it exists.

I see an internal logic to a lukewarmer position, to the «realist» position, to the «skeptic» position, to the «sky dragon» position, etc..

and, further that ANY policy even c02 taxes are consistent with the lukewarmer position on the science..

the gimmick in the lukewarmer position is that we do nt foreground the fat tail.

Historically the development of the lukewarmer position BEGAN with attribution assignments.

Bigterguy puts the lukewarmer position as «We have warmed, CO2 may have helped.».

hockeyschtick: Even the lukewarmer position has become untenable on the basis of both observations and theory:

If you select an empirical PDF (eg from Lewis & Curry, or several others), then the lukewarmer position is one that is pretty close to the median....

This is what ATTP writes: «The fundamental problem I have with the Lukewarmer position is that it appears to be based on the idea that everything could be fine, therefore let's proceed as if it will be fine.

Not exact matches

He described his position as a «lukewarmer», which sounds to me like someone who believes you can get a little bit pregnant.

Ben «'' If you chose the designation «lukewarmer» based on your estimation of ECS, we would have to assume that any position in the debate exists with respect to an estimate of ECS.

Lukewarmer as a position is not defined by its opposition.

If you chose the designation «lukewarmer» based on your estimation of ECS, we would have to assume that any position in the debate exists with respect to an estimate of ECS.

This still does not change the lukewarmer's position.

Most Lukewarmers who write about climate change have offered individual assessments, but none of us have said «this is a lukearmer position on adaptation or mitigation.»

So, anyone can self - identify or be designated as a «denier» / sceptic, «lukewarmer», or «warmist» with respect to ECS, and yet take any position WRT policy.

A pause that lasts 40 years hence would not be the position of a «lukewarmer».

Judith: «In the red area would be lukewarmers and skeptics, with the consensus position in green.»

In the red area would be lukewarmers and skeptics, with the consensus position in green.

Perhaps the Government should shut down Spencer and Christy, and gag all climate skeptics (and lukewarmers, and anyone that even slightly disagrees with the Concensus) because having someone shoot at their building clearly shows their position is inciting the Climate Faithful to violence.

Many have begun to adopt a so - called «lukewarmer» position, which means they now accept the basics of climate science but don't think it's worth investing heavily today to prevent or limit a problem that will increasingly hit home in the decades ahead.

Over the last three years, I've had the opportunity to meet with scientists who occupy different positions on the climate spectrum: Some are out - and - out «skeptics»; some broadly agree with the so - called «consensus» but dislike its intolerance; others define themselves as «lukewarmers» or have only relatively modest disagreements with Mann & Co - yet even that can not be tolerated by the Big Climate enforcers.

I find it interesting that the warmist camp have found themselves moving their goalposts and seem to have camped out with their new mantra «2C is dangerous» firmly in the «lukewarmers» (< 3C) position.

Most lukewarmers (including myself) will tell you that our reading of the data brought us to our position regardless of where it lies on the spectrum of views on the issue.

Another commenter here, also an amateur philosopher who once saw a meme about logical fallacies, said that because lukewarmers, whatever they may be, take a position between two extremes, they must necessarily be wrong.

From what I have read about his position over the years, he sounds like a typical lukewarmer.

The spectrum of positions held by this fringe element range from those who deny the existence of the so - called greenhouse effect, to self proclaimed «lukewarmers» and fake skeptics.

«For myself and those other Lukewarmers I am in regular contact with, our position is not just the adoption of a mid-range between Alarmists and Skeptics.