Sentences with phrase «side of the climate debate think»

Sensible commentators from more than one side of the climate debate think the bona fide Heartland documents contain nothing particularly new, revealing, or significant (see here, here, here, and here).

Not exact matches

This post about the Suzuki - Pembina report is a case in point: both sides of the debate seemed to think that I was offering aid and succor to the cause of the climate change deniers.

On the whole, I think Revkin has tried to be fair to all sides of the climate change debate.

Energy analysts at the Brookings Institution, a centrist think tank, see an opportunity for Obama to use his high - profile speech to bring together both sides of the climate - change debate.

The sands of the climate debate are surely shifting rapidly, with major implications for those who are active in the public debate — scientist / advocates on both sides, environmentalists and the libertarian think tanks, the media, and policy makers and politicians.

Wow, its sure good that the world has decided that skeptics are the mindless, thuggish, anti-science side of this debate, because if that had not already been made clear, we might think that key climate alarmism groups had lost their freaking minds.

But it does suggest that if both sides of the debate paid close attention to the social consequences of policies, rather than the present intractable debate on the reality of AGW, then we might get to a point where we can agree on some action — you might think it is pointless with regard to the climate (but a substantial proportion of people think it will), but if it produces some other good outcomes it might be ok.

But it does suggest that if both sides of the debate paid close attention to the social consequences of policies, rather than the present intractable debate on the reality of AGW, then we might get to a point where we can agree on some action — you might think it is pointless with regard to the climate (but a substantial proportion of people think it will), but if it produces some other good outcomes it might be OK.

These thoughts were reinforced a couple of weeks ago talking to Eli Lehrer from R Street at a debate held in DC between Lehrer and Bob Inglis on one side and James Taylor (Heartland) and David Kreutzer, (Heritage) about how to deal with climate change.

If you think that the climate debate is dominated by arguments related to cultural values and not science, indeed you seem to imply this, then it seems you're broadly in agreement with all my posts including this one, none of which advocate or defend any physical climate science or data from any side in the debate.

Climate change skeptics like James Taylor, environmental policy fellow at the Heartland Institute, a conservative think tank, said the pushback in schools and legislatures reflected public frustration at being told «only one side of the global warming debate — the scientifically controversial theory that humans are creating a global warming crisis.»