Years ago Lomborg and scientific american had a major clash. There was quite a lot to it, here's a summary (https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/a-respons

Years ago Lomborg and scientific american had a major clash. There was quite a lot to it, here's a summary (https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/a-response-to-lomborgs-re/ https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/a-response-to-lom...) "Selective citations of the literature allow Lomborg to make statements that are correct but unrepresentative of the best, full state of environmental scientific knowledge" "Yet his [lomborg's] critics are rarely attacking the facts in his citations per se; they fault what Lomborg does with them and, of course, his neglect of more relevant citations elsewhere." Anyway, that's SA's side. Follow the link to find more. Caveats: this was years ago, and the quotes above are my selection, which you may consider one-sided.