Not exact matches
However, I have
very little idea what the effects of AGW on humanity will be beyond the fact that it is an ecological disaster which can kill lots of people in the developing world (
excellent reasons to do whatever it takes to get rid of it, in my opinion) and so I have a problem with responding to the
argument that we need do nothing because at least as far as the DEVELOPED world is concerned AGW will be at most a nuisance.
Excellent post with several significant points, but still a focus on tropospheric temperatures as «validation» for the models is a
very weak
argument.
Excellent blog summarising the
argument very well, better not to use energy rather than pay to generate it.
The comments from the judges in each of our 3 preliminary rounds also supported our confidence - we were told we had great poise, knew the
arguments very well, made
excellent eye contact with the judges, were respectful and yet, forceful and confident with our
arguments.
The «brilliant» Evan Tager garners accolades for his «incredibly cerebral approach,» with clients describing him as «an
excellent appellate writer and
very good on his feet during oral
arguments.»
«She is an
excellent advocate and
very decisive, with well - structured skeleton
arguments.»