3 ms·
Mod parent up. This is why Bjorn Lomborg is reviled: not because he doubts that anthropogenic global warming is for real, but because he has the temerity to su
by bwhite 17y ago
Mod parent up.
This is why Bjorn Lomborg is reviled: not because he doubts that anthropogenic global warming is for real, but because he has the temerity to suggest that the cure (spending a kajillion dollars to achieve relatively small changes in climate) may be worse than the disease. See http://www.ted.com/talks/bjorn_lomborg_sets_global_priorities.html http://www.ted.com/talks/bjorn_lomborg_sets_global_prioritie....
And dancing about, declaring that the science is settled, and claiming to know the One True Solution to something as inherently complex as climate is indicative of failure to understand the science, which leads to politically motivated footballs like this: http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/06/25/source-inside-epa-confirms-claims-of-science-being-ignored-by-top-epa-management/ http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/06/25/source-inside-epa-conf...
- Tichy 17y agoI personally disklike him because in his speeches (like the TED one) he seemed to make a lot of strawman arguments - like dwelling on "heat deaths being a non-issue" when really I don't think it ever was an issue.
- Bjoern 17y agoIn 2003 in Europe roughly 35.000 people died from heat. That is not an issue?
- Tichy 17y agoSure, but I don't think fear of an increase of heat deaths was an major concern in the climate debate. At least I never heard about it before the Lomborg talk. And I think he made it clear (if he is to believed), that heat deaths indeed are not a thing to worry about with climate change.
- anamax 17y agoHow many people died from cold? How many from heat? Note that I'm not restricting my query to Europe. Feel free to explain which people should count and how much.