This kind of essay is a piece of writing, aim of which is to state
your opinion upon some topics.
Not exact matches
Though scientific consensus must always be open to responsible skepticism given: (a) the strength of the consensus on this
topic, (b) the enormity of the harms predicted by the consensus view, (c) an approximately 30 year delay in taking action that has transpired since a serious climate change debate began in the United States in the early 1980s, (d) a delay that has made the problem worse while making it more difficult to achieve ghg emissions reductions necessary to prevent dangerous climate change because of the steepness of reductions now needed, no politician can ethically justify his or her refusal to support action on climate change based
upon a personal
opinion that is not supported by strong scientific evidence that has been reviewed by scientific organizations with a wide breadth of interdisciplinary scientific expertise.
In the interests of remaining on
topic, I'll just note (as many others have) that public policy decisions are driven by the information available, that on complex subjects we depend
upon expert
opinion, and that due to some rather serious efforts by «skeptics» there is a gap between the expert
opinion and the public perception of the same.
She is regularly called
upon by national and local media to contribute her
opinion and share valuable advice on such
topics as:
It feels dangerous to approach one another on any
topic even remotely touching
upon feelings, thoughts, memories or perceptions, much less
opinions.