4 ms·

I strongly recommend 'Apocalypse Never: Why Environmental Alarmism Hurts Us All' by Michael Shellenberger https://read.amazon.com/kp/embed?asin=B07Y8FHFQ7&prev

I strongly recommend 'Apocalypse Never: Why Environmental Alarmism Hurts Us All' by Michael Shellenberger https://read.amazon.com/kp/embed?asin=B07Y8FHFQ7&preview=newtab&linkCode=kpe&ref_=cm_sw_r_kb_dp_8CS2EJPGZWTF12Y1V9ZW https://read.amazon.com/kp/embed?asin=B07Y8FHFQ7&preview=new...

adamnemecek 5y ago
What’s the summary?
- tobiasu 5y ago
  Nuclear and shale gas shill writes how technology will solve everything.
  - ren_engineer 5y ago
    as opposed to solar and wind "shills" who say humanity is doomed if the government doesn't funnel billions of dollars to their industries? Each side has monetary incentives to push their view point Fact is that without the fear mongering about nuclear energy decades ago we'd probably be carbon neutral by now
benzible 5y ago
Really, don't bother https://climatefeedback.org/evaluation/article-by-michael-shellenberger-mixes-accurate-and-inaccurate-claims-in-support-of-a-misleading-and-overly-simplistic-argumentation-about-climate-change/ https://climatefeedback.org/evaluation/article-by-michael-sh...
UncleMeat 5y ago
Maybe it'd be better to read the opinions of relevant faculty instead. I know at least one climate science faculty who has publicly referred to Shellenberger as a "professional asshole" after being treated so poorly by Shellenberger. Shellenberger is just next in the long list of industry shills who peddle the same misinformation and then complain when researchers get mad at him, claiming endless victimhood.
- plandis 5y ago
  As hominem attacks are not a good way to discredit an argument though.
  - UncleMeat 5y ago
    Shellenberger's arguments have been discredited for decades. At some point, it is just a denial of service attack against researchers with better things to do with their time when he says "fight me fight me fight me fight me" over and over. It is the same rhetorical trick. At some point, you just get frustrated and call somebody an asshole and move on. Yes, it isn't sound logical thinking to say "tons of relevant experts in this field think this guy is an idiot." But it definitely is a strong bayesian update.
crackercrews 5y ago
I wasn't overly impressed by Apocalypse Never. It has some interesting tidbits, sure. But ultimately a lot of the argument was about reframing harm as deaths instead of dollars: we have better technology so we can avoid deaths from natural disasters. That's good but if we are causing natural disasters to be worse and the sea level to rise that's still something we should seek to avoid. I found Unsettled, [1] by former Caltech provost Steven Koonin to be much more compelling. The approach is rigorous and scientific. The author is not partisan. He did work for BP but also served in the Obama administration. He brings to the climate debate a rational skepticism that is typically discouraged in polite/liberal company. IMO it was at least 2x as compelling as Apocalypse Never. 1: https://www.amazon.com/Unsettled-Climate-Science-Doesnt-Matters/dp/1950665798 https://www.amazon.com/Unsettled-Climate-Science-Doesnt-Matt...

adamnemecek 5y ago

What’s the summary?

tobiasu 5y ago
Nuclear and shale gas shill writes how technology will solve everything.
- ren_engineer 5y ago
  as opposed to solar and wind "shills" who say humanity is doomed if the government doesn't funnel billions of dollars to their industries? Each side has monetary incentives to push their view point Fact is that without the fear mongering about nuclear energy decades ago we'd probably be carbon neutral by now

benzible 5y ago

Really, don't bother https://climatefeedback.org/evaluation/article-by-michael-shellenberger-mixes-accurate-and-inaccurate-claims-in-support-of-a-misleading-and-overly-simplistic-argumentation-about-climate-change/ https://climatefeedback.org/evaluation/article-by-michael-sh...

UncleMeat 5y ago

Maybe it'd be better to read the opinions of relevant faculty instead. I know at least one climate science faculty who has publicly referred to Shellenberger as a "professional asshole" after being treated so poorly by Shellenberger. Shellenberger is just next in the long list of industry shills who peddle the same misinformation and then complain when researchers get mad at him, claiming endless victimhood.

plandis 5y ago
As hominem attacks are not a good way to discredit an argument though.
- UncleMeat 5y ago
  Shellenberger's arguments have been discredited for decades. At some point, it is just a denial of service attack against researchers with better things to do with their time when he says "fight me fight me fight me fight me" over and over. It is the same rhetorical trick. At some point, you just get frustrated and call somebody an asshole and move on. Yes, it isn't sound logical thinking to say "tons of relevant experts in this field think this guy is an idiot." But it definitely is a strong bayesian update.

crackercrews 5y ago

I wasn't overly impressed by Apocalypse Never. It has some interesting tidbits, sure. But ultimately a lot of the argument was about reframing harm as deaths instead of dollars: we have better technology so we can avoid deaths from natural disasters. That's good but if we are causing natural disasters to be worse and the sea level to rise that's still something we should seek to avoid. I found Unsettled, [1] by former Caltech provost Steven Koonin to be much more compelling. The approach is rigorous and scientific. The author is not partisan. He did work for BP but also served in the Obama administration. He brings to the climate debate a rational skepticism that is typically discouraged in polite/liberal company. IMO it was at least 2x as compelling as Apocalypse Never. 1: https://www.amazon.com/Unsettled-Climate-Science-Doesnt-Matters/dp/1950665798 https://www.amazon.com/Unsettled-Climate-Science-Doesnt-Matt...