3 ms·

your comment is still a gross misrepresentation of the economist 'voice'. I've been a semi-regular reader for at least 20 years, for instance, and have never se

your comment is still a gross misrepresentation of the economist 'voice'. I've been a semi-regular reader for at least 20 years, for instance, and have never seen or heard reference to Bjorn Lomborg. For example, I just logged in and searched for him - there are 5 articles he appears in since 2001. I struggle to find any sort of COVID skepticism or 'behind the science' viewpoint with their reporting, frankly I don't think this is true unless you can point to an example of it, and as a Doctor I am acutely sensitive to bad reporting on this. I don't particularly understand the economist hate that periodically appears here, except to acknowledge that there are different viewpoints, and unless you're radically one way or the other as it pertains to the US culture war which threatens every day to engulf normal discourse everywhere - a society in a phase change either to something greater or to a race to the bottom.

ZeroGravitas 3y ago
I'm not saying The Economist is batshit insane enough to still be pushing Trump style lies about climate change. But it's an absolute fact that Trump and Putin only managed to get away with such insanities because for decades the right wing, after initially accepting climate science and starting to put measures in place, got bought by fossil fuel interests. The Economist was and still is part of that. https://www.economist.com/finance-and-economics/2022/06/23/the-rights-and-wrongs-of-investing-in-natural-gas https://www.economist.com/finance-and-economics/2022/06/23/t... Here's an article from 2022 and yeah it's not Trump level "China Hoax" stuff, but it's still clearly worrying that investing in gas isn't attractive enough, as if that's the big problem we face. Similarly the current article. Expensive energy kills apparently, so what's the cheapest source of Winter heating? Wind powered heat pumps in well insulated homes? Probably not worth mentioning, just underline that without Russian gas we die.
- green_man_lives 3y ago
  > Similarly the current article. Expensive energy kills apparently, so what's the cheapest source of Winter heating? Wind powered heat pumps in well insulated homes? Probably not worth mentioning, just underline that without Russian gas we die. Bingo.

ZeroGravitas 3y ago

I'm not saying The Economist is batshit insane enough to still be pushing Trump style lies about climate change. But it's an absolute fact that Trump and Putin only managed to get away with such insanities because for decades the right wing, after initially accepting climate science and starting to put measures in place, got bought by fossil fuel interests. The Economist was and still is part of that. https://www.economist.com/finance-and-economics/2022/06/23/the-rights-and-wrongs-of-investing-in-natural-gas https://www.economist.com/finance-and-economics/2022/06/23/t... Here's an article from 2022 and yeah it's not Trump level "China Hoax" stuff, but it's still clearly worrying that investing in gas isn't attractive enough, as if that's the big problem we face. Similarly the current article. Expensive energy kills apparently, so what's the cheapest source of Winter heating? Wind powered heat pumps in well insulated homes? Probably not worth mentioning, just underline that without Russian gas we die.

green_man_lives 3y ago
> Similarly the current article. Expensive energy kills apparently, so what's the cheapest source of Winter heating? Wind powered heat pumps in well insulated homes? Probably not worth mentioning, just underline that without Russian gas we die. Bingo.