I am concerned that these major institutional changes to the native title claim resolution process is being proposed in a Bill
without significant argument having been advanced as to the need for these particular changes, or any analysis of the likely costs and benefits of these proposals.
Not exact matches
This would at least introduce the possibility of approaching the doctrine of analogy
without sheer bewilderment, but before reconsidering the
argument in these terms, we must first note that the acknowledgment that some terms can be applied to God univocally has very
significant consequences.
Students can,
without significant scaffolding, comprehend and evaluate complex texts across a range of types and disciplines, and they can construct effective
arguments and convey intricate or multifaceted information... Students adapt their communication in relation to audience, task, purpose, and discipline.
... can,
without significant scaffolding, comprehend and evaluate complex texts across a range of types and disciplines, and they can construct effective
arguments and convey intricate or multifaceted information.
Of course Mass may feel that a linear regression of average Texas summer temperatures since 1895 provides conclusive evidence for his case that AGW is currently far too weak to play a
significant role in the Texas 2011 heatwave (an
argument he recycles in his Aug 9 blog post), but it is strange Mass picks on Rupp et al 2012
without mentioning Massey et al 2012 in the same collection of papers that similarly finds AGW impacts in excess of Mass's method (3 times in excess by my calculation).
Their
argument — in which they had much support from other developing nations — was: Screw you guys if you think we're going to dramatically reduce emissions
without a
significant amount of foreign aid from the countries who have vastly outstripped our own cumulative emissions.
Turning the
argument around, we shouldn't continue to burn fossil fuels
without limit UNLESS we can be reasonably sure that doing so won't lead to
significant harms.
I do not find the CAGW
argument to be superficially attractive given that we are here some 4 1/2 billion years after the planet was formed during which time there have been
significant climatic changes (far exceeeding those presently happening) and in particular times when CO2 has been about 1000 times higher
without catastrophic effect.