Poll: Global Warming?

[Ponder This]

Lomborg is not, however, a natural scientist, still less a climatologist. His training was in political science, and he has subsequently worked in statistics and economics, apparently.

Lomborg does not deny the reality of climate change, but thinks it is a less important issue than others facing the world. Almost nobody working in climate science agrees. There are always contrarians in any debate and he just seems to be one.

Obviously, climate change is real and Bjorn Lomborg asserts that climate change is real. We agree.
That people who work in climate science believe that climate change is the most important issue... is rather unsurprising. It's likely that one of the reasons they work in climate science is because they already believed climate science was more important. It seems to me that people who work in climate science are going to say that their issue is the most important, but Bjorn Lomborg has actually done work to compare the climate change issue with other important issues that face the world. And, unlike people working in climate science, this is what Bjorn Lomborg does for a living: evaluate all the issues facing the world.

 

[exchemist]

Obviously, climate change is real and Bjorn Lomborg asserts that climate change is real. We agree.
That people who work in climate science believe that climate change is the most important issue... is rather unsurprising. It's likely that one of the reasons they work in climate science is because they already believed climate science was more important. It seems to me that people who work in climate science are going to say that their issue is the most important, but Bjorn Lomborg has actually done work to compare the climate change issue with other important issues that face the world. And, unlike people working in climate science, this is what Bjorn Lomborg does for a living: evaluate all the issues facing the world.

Yes, and Patrick Minford continues to think Brexit will be good for the economy of the UK. If you look hard enough you will always find someone to endorse a point of view.

I've no doubt Lomborg revels in his enfant terrible status. But he's on his own: almost nobody informed buys his arguments.

 

[Guitar's Cry]

Bjorn Lomborg

Bjorn is a political scientist, not an actual scientist. ;-)

Analysis of "The Alarming Thing About Climate Alarmism"

 

[Ponder This]

Yes, and Patrick Minford continues to think Brexit will be good for the economy of the UK. If you look hard enough you will always find someone to endorse a point of view.

I've no doubt Lomborg revels in his enfant terrible status. But he's on his own: almost nobody informed buys his arguments.

You should've offerred some counter-argument instead of trying to malign Bjorn by falsely associating him with someone addressing an entirely different topic.

Bjorn is a political scientist, not an actual scientist. ;-)

Analysis of "The Alarming Thing About Climate Alarmism"

This is a much better rebuttal. However, if you read, then you see that none of those who disagree are able to rebut Lomborg's evidence. Instead, they make claims that his evidence is cherry-picked. Compare that to the principle claim of the article: that "a one-sided focus on worst-case stories is a poor foundation for sound policies." Bjorn Lomborg is specifically pointing out some of the one-sided focus that actually occurs and its effect on policy.

The main rebuttal states:

the reductions in deaths that he reports can be attributed largely to reactions undertaken by communities and societies because they had recognized the “dark tails” of what the future might hold

The rebuttal claims that focusing on scenarios that don't occur is the right thing to do. The rebuttal is literally doing the thing that Bjorn Lomborg has just pointed out actually happens.

 

[exchemist]

You should've offerred some counter-argument instead of trying to malign Bjorn by falsely associating him with someone addressing an entirely different topic.



.

I don't have the time or energy to research all the crank notions that people bring up on internet forums, in order to rebut them. Just as we don't all have time to stop to listen to the nutter on the street corner and engage him in earnest conversation. We all make judgements about who to take seriously, and I've read and heard enough about Lomborg in the past not to bother.

The association is not false, by the way. Minford is an eccentric academic who thinks Brexit will be good for the UK economy. Almost no other economist agrees with him, but he remains the economist that Brexit true believers always quote, as if his was an alternative view of equal credibility with the one everyone else holds, which is the opposite. The parallel with Lomborg and climate change refuseniks is identical: pick the one eccentric academic you can find and pretend his opinion is equal in weight to that of everyone else.

 

[Ponder This]

The association is not false, by the way. Minford is an eccentric academic who thinks Brexit will be good for the UK economy.

Bjorn Lomborg is not an "eccentric academic", but ironically his objectors are academics.

I don't have the time or energy to research all the crank notions that people bring up on internet forums, in order to rebut them. Just as we don't all have time to stop to listen to the nutter on the street corner and engage him in earnest conversation. We all make judgements about who to take seriously, and I've read and heard enough about Lomborg in the past not to bother.

I see: you don't have the time or energy to properly consider Bjorn Lomborg's statements, but you have the time and energy to cast aspersions and manufacture associations out of nothing.

 

[exchemist]

Bjorn Lomborg is not an "eccentric academic", but ironically his objectors are academics.



I see: you don't have the time or energy to properly consider Bjorn Lomborg's statements, but you have the time and energy to cast aspersions and manufacture associations out of nothing.

No, not out of nothing, but from the opinions of a lot of people who do know what they are talking about.
Bjørn Lomborg - Wikipedia
Climate cost study authors accuse Bjørn Lomborg of misinterpreting results | Temperature Check

 

[Ponder This]

No, not out of nothing, but from the opinions of a lot of people who do know what they are talking about.
Bjørn Lomborg - Wikipedia
Climate cost study authors accuse Bjørn Lomborg of misinterpreting results | Temperature Check

Wow, a climate study has such exaggerrated peer reviewed results that its own authors object to its use.
It seems to me this is very discrediting for climate scientists. Did you read the article past the headline?
How costly would you characterize proposed climate change policies to be?