Anyone else reading Bjorn Lomborg's "False Alarm"?

[typical_analytical]

Just started it after seeing him interviewed by Peter Robinson.

 

[Captain Adverse]

Just started it after seeing him interviewed by Peter Robinson.

Never heard of him until this thread.

It would be helpful to not assume everyone (if anyone) knows what you are talking about.

Links are helpful. Example:

False Alarm: How Climate Change Panic Costs Us Trillions, Hurts the Poor, and Fails to Fix the Planet|Paperback

An “important” (Times UK) and “meticulously researched” (Forbes) book by the “skeptical environmentalist” argues that panic over climate change is causing more harm than good Hurricanes batter our coasts. Wildfires...

www.barnesandnoble.com

 

[swing_voter]

Hurricanes batter our coasts. Wildfires rage across the American West. Glaciers collapse in the Artic. Politicians, activists, and the media espouse a common message: climate change is destroying the planet, and we must take drastic action immediately to stop it. Children panic about their future, and adults wonder if it is even ethical to bring new life into the world.

Enough, argues bestselling author Bjorn Lomborg. Climate change is real, but it's not the apocalyptic threat that we've been told it is. Projections of Earth's imminent demise are based on bad science and even worse economics. In panic, world leaders have committed to wildly expensive but largely ineffective policies that hamper growth and crowd out more pressing investments in human capital, from immunization to education.

False Alarm will convince you that everything you think about climate change is wrong -- and points the way toward making the world a vastly better, if slightly warmer, place for us all.



I prefer to believe in what 99% of scientists are telling us. That global warming is real, man made, and that it's happening at an alarming rate.

​

Bjorn Lomborg sounds like a dangerous goof.


.

 

[fortune]

Never heard of him until this thread.

It would be helpful to not assume everyone (if anyone) knows what you are talking about.

Links are helpful. Example:

False Alarm: How Climate Change Panic Costs Us Trillions, Hurts the Poor, and Fails to Fix the Planet|Paperback

An “important” (Times UK) and “meticulously researched” (Forbes) book by the “skeptical environmentalist” argues that panic over climate change is causing more harm than good Hurricanes batter our coasts. Wildfires...

www.barnesandnoble.com

I have read his books since the beginning of this century... NYT best seller and Times mag's top 100 most influential people in the world.

 

[longview]

Hurricanes batter our coasts. Wildfires rage across the American West. Glaciers collapse in the Artic. Politicians, activists, and the media espouse a common message: climate change is destroying the planet, and we must take drastic action immediately to stop it. Children panic about their future, and adults wonder if it is even ethical to bring new life into the world.

Enough, argues bestselling author Bjorn Lomborg. Climate change is real, but it's not the apocalyptic threat that we've been told it is. Projections of Earth's imminent demise are based on bad science and even worse economics. In panic, world leaders have committed to wildly expensive but largely ineffective policies that hamper growth and crowd out more pressing investments in human capital, from immunization to education.

False Alarm will convince you that everything you think about climate change is wrong -- and points the way toward making the world a vastly better, if slightly warmer, place for us all.



I prefer to believe in what 99% of scientists are telling us. That global warming is real, man made, and that it's happening at an alarming rate.

​

Bjorn Lomborg sounds like a dangerous goof.


.

Except the only thing that 99% of the scientists agree on, is that,
A: The average global temperature has increased over the last century, and,
B: That Human activity likely played a role in the observed warming.
At least that is what NASA Scientific Consensus statement says.
Scientific Consensus: Earth's Climate Is Warming

Multiple studies published in peer-reviewed scientific journals1 show that 97 percent or more of actively publishing climate scientists agree*
: Climate-warming trends over the past century are extremely likely due to human activities.

 

[Lord of Planar]

Never heard of him until this thread.

That's because he is one of the most respected skeptics out there, and therefor isn't fit to by the biased media. Anyone trying to trash him is a fool.

It would be helpful to not assume everyone (if anyone) knows what you are talking about.

Yep. The climate science is far from settled.

Links are helpful. Example:

False Alarm: How Climate Change Panic Costs Us Trillions, Hurts the Poor, and Fails to Fix the Planet|Paperback

An “important” (Times UK) and “meticulously researched” (Forbes) book by the “skeptical environmentalist” argues that panic over climate change is causing more harm than good Hurricanes batter our coasts. Wildfires...

www.barnesandnoble.com

I think I will go and buy it.

 

[Lord of Planar]

Except the only thing that 99% of the scientists agree on, is that,
A: The average global temperature has increased over the last century, and,
B: That Human activity likely played a role in the observed warming.
At least that is what NASA Scientific Consensus statement says.
Scientific Consensus: Earth's Climate Is Warming

Easy on the facts now. To many people prefer what the bloggers and other pundits tell them.

 

[Hafnium1979]

Easy on the facts now. To many people prefer what the bloggers and other pundits tell them.

You guys seem to act like the world's experts don't think of AGW as something really serious, though. That's the interesting bit. Like you seem to think the world's experts say "Meh, yeah the temp has gone up, blah, blah, blah". When IN FACT if you were to actually talk to those experts you'd find that they DO take it seriously. Which is why they continue to study it and publish non-stop on the topic.

I know people have been over this before but scientific articles are hardly "hyperbolic" in their tone for obviously reasons. That's just not how scientific articles read, but personally I've not met or heard any talks from experts on climate who don't find AGW to be a serious concern.

Maybe you haven't been to many talks or hung out among them? I don't know. Maybe all you know of them is the dry language of the peer reviewed articles, and even THAT is actually pretty serious on the topic.

 

[Lord of Planar]

You guys seem to act like the world's experts don't think of AGW as something really serious, though. That's the interesting bit. Like you seem to think the world's experts say "Meh, yeah the temp has gone up, blah, blah, blah". When IN FACT if you were to actually talk to those experts you'd find that they DO take it seriously. Which is why they continue to study it and publish non-stop on the topic.

Not at all. Have you read what the experts have published when it comes to consensus? It appears you haven't.

I know people have been over this before but scientific articles are hardly "hyperbolic" in their tone for obviously reasons. That's just not how scientific articles read, but personally I've not met or heard any talks from experts on climate who don't find AGW to be a serious concern.

You talk to experts on the subject?

Good for you. Please don't expect me to believe that since the experts that write the papers cannot back it up in an explicit manner.

Maybe you haven't been to many talks or hung out among them? I don't know. Maybe all you know of them is the dry language of the peer reviewed articles, and even THAT is actually pretty serious on the topic.

I get that many of these scientists have serious opinions on the topic, but they have not yet found it in the science to to make solid claims.

 

[Hafnium1979]

You talk to experts on the subject?

I have. At one point I worked at Columbia University as a tech in their earth sciences/oceanography division and met quite a few of the experts! I even got to briefly meet Wally Broecker! I also got to meet a lot of folks at Woods Hole as well as Scripps Oceanography. I once got to have a one-on-one conversation with WALTER MUNK! I got to hear talks from Michael Mann and others. So, yeah, I have.

 

[Lord of Planar]

I have. At one point I worked at Columbia University as a tech in their earth sciences/oceanography division and met quite a few of the experts! I even got to briefly meet Wally Broecker! I also got to meet a lot of folks at Woods Hole as well as Scripps Oceanography. I once got to have a one-on-one conversation with WALTER MUNK! I got to hear talks from Michael Mann and others. So, yeah, I have.

Wally:

The climate system has jumped from one mode of operation to another in the past. We are trying to understand how the earth's climate system is engineered, so we can understand what it takes to trigger mode switches. Until we do, we cannot make good predictions about future climate change... Over the last several hundred thousand years, climate change has come mainly in discrete jumps that appear to be related to changes in the mode of thermohaline circulation. We place strong emphasis on using isotopes as a means to understand physical mixing and chemical cycling in the ocean, and the climate history as recorded in marine sediments.

Wallace S. Broecker - The Earth Institute - Columbia University

He looks pretty sane on the topic to me. I didn't find much on Walter. Michael Mann is a tool.

 

[fortune]

Lomborg is not a conservative. He is social leftest and environmentalist (and a homosexual vegetarian if that matters). Where he gets in some peoples brain is when he says that we should not be using science so politically but instead of finding ways to reverse climate change we need to find ways to "prepare" societies (especially the poor) to to deal with warming that was coming a long time ago. Very pro taxation dude. Just read his books with an open mind.

 

[Lord of Planar]

Lomborg is not a conservative. He is social leftest and environmentalist (and a homosexual vegetarian if that matters).

It doesn't.

Where he gets in some peoples brain is when he says that we should not be using science so politically but instead of finding ways to reverse climate change we need to find ways to "prepare" societies (especially the poor) to to deal with warming that was coming a long time ago. Very pro taxation dude. Just read his books with an open mind.

The way you say it is too general. Too much room for confirmation bias. Have any specifics?

I would say the same thing when it comes to sea level rise. We might be increasing the rate a little, but the sea levels will increase without our help.

What form of taxes is he for? Everyone is "pro tax" that realizes we need a general fund for the general welfare of the people.

 

[fortune]

It doesn't.

The way you say it is too general. Too much room for confirmation bias. Have any specifics?

I would say the same thing when it comes to sea level rise. We might be increasing the rate a little, but the sea levels will increase without our help.

What form of taxes is he for? Everyone is "pro tax" that realizes we need a general fund for the general welfare of the people.

and yet you have not read any of his books, poser.

 

[Lord of Planar]

and yet you have not read any of his books, poser.

Your incorrect labeling is not appreciated. I said I was going to buy the book. I have seen his work in the past, then a translation to his papers was available.

Can you elaborate on what you said, or are you just trying to stir the pot?

 

[Lord of Planar]

I only finished the introduction so far, and it reinforces my beliefs.

I read the foirst part of chapter 1 as well.

 

[Buzz]

I only finished the introduction so far, and it reinforces my beliefs.

I read the foirst part of chapter 1 as well.

View attachment 67345176

Well... so much for getting all your facts from peer-reviewed and published science.

 

[Lord of Planar]

Well... so much for getting all your facts from peer-reviewed and published science.

He is one of the most respected scientists out there.

 

[Buzz]

He is one of the most respected scientists out there.

No, he isn't. As far as I am aware he has never had anything published in a peer-reviewed scientific journal. As a matter of fact, his Ph.D. is in political science.

But feel free to give us all some more screenshots of what you think are important parts of the book. And don't forget to provide the references to back those points up.

 

[watsup]

Easy on the facts now. To many people prefer what the bloggers and other pundits tell them.

"Bloggers and pundits" talking points.

 

[watsup]

Wally:

​

The climate system has jumped from one mode of operation to another in the past. We are trying to understand how the earth's climate system is engineered, so we can understand what it takes to trigger mode switches. Until we do, we cannot make good predictions about future climate change... Over the last several hundred thousand years, climate change has come mainly in discrete jumps that appear to be related to changes in the mode of thermohaline circulation. We place strong emphasis on using isotopes as a means to understand physical mixing and chemical cycling in the ocean, and the climate history as recorded in marine sediments.​

​

Wallace S. Broecker - The Earth Institute - Columbia University

​

He looks pretty sane on the topic to me. I didn't find much on Walter. Michael Mann is a tool.

"Appear to be related to......" Where is his paper showing so?

 

[watsup]

I only finished the introduction so far, and it reinforces my beliefs.

I read the foirst part of chapter 1 as well.

View attachment 67345176

So his introduction is nothing more than a series of typical denier talking points. That pretty much says it all about his book.

 

[flogger]

Hurricanes batter our coasts. Wildfires rage across the American West. Glaciers collapse in the Artic. Politicians, activists, and the media espouse a common message: climate change is destroying the planet, and we must take drastic action immediately to stop it. Children panic about their future, and adults wonder if it is even ethical to bring new life into the world.

Enough, argues bestselling author Bjorn Lomborg. Climate change is real, but it's not the apocalyptic threat that we've been told it is. Projections of Earth's imminent demise are based on bad science and even worse economics. In panic, world leaders have committed to wildly expensive but largely ineffective policies that hamper growth and crowd out more pressing investments in human capital, from immunization to education.

False Alarm will convince you that everything you think about climate change is wrong -- and points the way toward making the world a vastly better, if slightly warmer, place for us all.



I prefer to believe in what 99% of scientists are telling us. That global warming is real, man made, and that it's happening at an alarming rate.

​

Bjorn Lomborg sounds like a dangerous goof.


.

So when were 99% of scientists ever polled about this ?