
Best-selling science fiction author Michael Crichton has penned a glowing review of Bjorn Lomborg's soon to be released book "Cool It: The Skeptical Environmentalist's Guide to Global Warming."
For those unfamiliar, Lomborg is an adjunct professor at the Copenhagen Business School and former director of the Environmental Assessment Institute. Although he believes in anthropogenic global warming, his controversial view is that there are far more serious problems facing the planet that governments should spend time and money solving.
As a result, his "Skeptical Environmentalist" series of books continually evoke great debate internationally.
With that in mind, the following are snippets of Crichton's review of Lomborg's most recent installment (emphasis added, h/t Glenn Reynolds):
Bjørn Lomborg is the best-informed and most humane advocate for environmental change in the world today. In contrast to other figures that promote a single issue while ignoring others, Lomborg views the globe as a whole, studies all the problems we face, ranks them, and determines how best, and in what order, we should address them.
[...]
Lomborg is only interested in real problems, and he has no patience with media fear-mongering; he begins by dispatching the myth of the endangered polar bears, showing that this Disneyesque cartoon has no relevance to the real world where polar bear populations are in fact increasing. Lomborg considers the issue in detail, citing sources from Al Gore to the World Wildlife Fund, then demonstrating that polar bear populations have actually increased five fold since the 1960s.
Lomborg then works his way through the concerns we hear so much about: higher temperatures, heat deaths, species extinctions, the cost of cutting carbon, the technology to do it. Lomborg believes firmly in climate change--despite his critics, he's no denier--but his fact-based approach, grounded in economic analyses, leads him again and again to a different view. He reviews published estimates of the cost of climate change, and the cost of addressing it, and concludes that "we actually end up paying more for a partial solution than the cost of the entire problem. That is a bad deal."
In some of the most disturbing chapters, Lomborg recounts what leading climate figures have said about anyone who questions the orthodoxy, thus demonstrating the illiberal, antidemocratic tone of the current debate. Lomborg himself takes the larger view, explaining in detail why the tone of hysteria is inappropriate to addressing the problems we face.
It is plain to see why Lomborg is such a controversial figure, as he is not afraid to call a spade a spade regardless of who might find such straight talk inconvenient.
Speaking of which, Lomborg is the person soon-to-be-Dr. Al Gore chickened out of an interview with in January (emphasis added):
The interview had been scheduled for months. The day before the interview Mr. Gore's agent thought Gore-meets-Lomborg would be great. Yet an hour later, he came back to tell us that Bjorn Lomborg should be excluded from the interview because he's been very critical of Mr. Gore's message about global warming and has questioned Mr. Gore's evenhandedness. According to the agent, Mr. Gore only wanted to have questions about his book and documentary, and only asked by a reporter.
As such, Lomborg is on a growing list of people that have challenged Gore to debate his junk science.
Of course, the Global Warmingist-in-Chief doesn't accept such challenges.
Why should he?
Or hadn't you heard that the debate is over?
—Noel Sheppard is the Associate Editor of NewsBusters.





















Editor at Large
Comments Policy
:)
August 11, 2007 - 18:22 ET by wiwfJust another book I need to add to my anti Global Warming stack. Thanks Noel!
btw, I'm back! :P
"Congressmen who willfully take actions during wartime that damage
morale and undermine the military are saboteurs and should be arrested,
exiled, or hanged." -Abraham Lincoln
WIWF
August 11, 2007 - 18:27 ET byso you are up there with Yasser Arafat? per your bio:
(In 2006, I was named TIME Magazine's Person of the Year!)
Supreme Court, National Security, Borders, Fiscal Restraint, my litmus test for President.
Crichton is a leader among GW skeptics
August 11, 2007 - 19:41 ET by GalvanicSome months ago, I watched Michael Crichton on the Charlie Rose Show; like Gore, Rose is PowerPoint-deep when it comes to AGW talking points. Each time Rose pushed a GW myth, Crichton demolished it, and at the end of the show, Rose invited him back to debate a GWer. Crichton accepted the challenge on the condition that he could use graphics to illustrate his points.
Not being a regular CRS viewer, I don't know if Crichton ever reappeared for the debate. Does anyone on NB-world know?
Not to my knowledge
August 12, 2007 - 10:12 ET by dscottNot to my knowledge either. Maybe we should tweak Charlie's email a bit.
The object of life is not to be on the side of the majority but to escape finding oneself in the ranks of the insane. Marcus Aurelius
Further Reading
August 11, 2007 - 19:57 ET by PopularTechBooks:
Global Warming and Other Eco Myths (Competitive Enterprise Institute)
Global Warming in a Politically Correct Climate: How Truth Became Controversial (Mihkel M. Mathiesen)
Human Impacts on Weather and Climate (William R. Cotton, Sr., Roger A. Pielke)
Meltdown: Meltdown: The Predictable Distortion of Global Warming by Scientists, Politicians, and the Media (Patrick J. Michaels)
Shattered Consensus: The True State of Global Warming (Patrick J. Michaels )
State of Fear (Michael Crichton)
The Chilling Stars: A New Theory of Climate Change (Henrik Svensmark)
The Politically Incorrect Guide to Global Warming (and Environmentalism) (Christopher C. Horner)
The Skeptical Environmentalist: Measuring the Real State of the World (Bjørn Lomborg)
Unstoppable Global Warming: Every 1,500 Years (Dennis T. Avery, S. Fred Singer)
Useless Arithmetic: Why Environmental Scientists Can't Predict the Future (Orrin H. Pilkey, Linda Pilkey-Jarvis)
The Anti "Man-Made" Global Warming Resource
Credentials
August 11, 2007 - 20:01 ET by PopularTechI case anyone tries to question these guys credentials:
Bjørn Lomborg, Ph.D. Political Science, University of Copenhagen
Michael Crichton, M.D. Harvard
The Anti "Man-Made" Global Warming Resource
Wish I'd been an economist
August 12, 2007 - 00:00 ET by krismcsherryIt seems to me I read of more level-headed, non-hysterical pragmatic approaches on climate change from economists and poly sci experts than amongst other professions.
If so, which came first, the chicken or the egg? Were they already practical, logical people or did their education make them that way? Little of both?
"Were they already
August 12, 2007 - 06:26 ET by rob6677"Were they already practical, logical people or did their education make them that way? Little of both?"
I would say it's just plain common sense that makes people practical, level headed etc. The only thing that separates them from the rest of us is a PHD that enables them to interpret the technical stuff and make the common more sensible!
"I may be crazy, but at least I'm not stupid" ME
}}---> Neither, rob
August 12, 2007 - 06:50 ET by Cool ArrowYou just have to consider where the next lump of grant money is coming from.
Crichton doesn't have to suck up to the hysteria movement to put food on the table. PHD doesn't mean anything in light of the big pile of dough to divvy up.
I agree with you there, I
August 12, 2007 - 07:22 ET by rob6677I agree with you there, I would always question someone that is after a grant rather than those who are established in their beliefs and can make it in the real world.
P.S. Did you figure out how to make those links shorter? I sent you a message!
"I may be crazy, but at least I'm not stupid" ME
}}---> We'll see rob
August 12, 2007 - 07:32 ET by Cool ArrowLaugh all you want if this doesn't work. I've been inspired very much by this.
Here goes
Works like a charm, and so
August 12, 2007 - 07:36 ET by rob6677Works like a charm, and so easy to do!
Now just give me your credit card number and your personal information!!!
"I may be crazy, but at least I'm not stupid" ME
}}---> BR549
August 12, 2007 - 07:41 ET by Cool ArrowIt's a really old credit card, and I only use it for 900 numbers.
Thanks for the lesson.
lol, you should be teaching
August 12, 2007 - 07:43 ET by rob6677lol, you should be teaching me stuff like that I'm pretty new here compared to you!
"I may be crazy, but at least I'm not stupid" ME
Yet u admit yer crazy. ;-)
August 12, 2007 - 15:31 ET by fastfoodIf it ain't broke, why screw it up.
Exactly
August 12, 2007 - 13:34 ET by Seabeach4348The hysterics alway claim that "the earth is changing....." {include omenous backgound music here in minor key}
When is the earth NOT changing? When in past geological time has the earth been totally stable? And just what is the "normal" temperture of the earth?
I was watching a National Geographic episode on how the jellyfish propulation throughout the world is just exploding out of control....and that there's nothing we can do to stop it. And, of course, the usual and customary conclusion leap: humans are the cause, especially industrialized nations. (Probably translation: Industrialized nations = USA)
Little known fact regarding climate.
August 12, 2007 - 15:35 ET by fastfoodIt changes.
If it ain't broke, why screw it up.
Little known fact regarding climate.
August 12, 2007 - 15:36 ET by fastfoodIt changes.
If it ain't broke, why screw it up.
Yet
August 12, 2007 - 15:40 ET by fastfoodmost indutrialized nations damage the environment the least.
If it ain't broke, why screw it up.
Not since last Feb.
August 12, 2007 - 15:25 ET by fastfoodNot since last Feb. 19.
Perhaps all in favor should email CR at
charlierose AT pbs.org and ask him to bring back Michael Crichton for another dose of reality.
If it ain't broke, why screw it up.
Crichton vs. Bonds
August 13, 2007 - 12:44 ET by seekerthe same week that Barry Bonds hit another home run, 8 million people were displaced by monsoon floods in India, Nephal, and South Asia. My guess is that Crichton thinks Bonds's home run is more important.
}}---> You seek amiss
August 13, 2007 - 12:48 ET by Cool ArrowWhy do you say that, seeker?
Do you have knowledge that Crichton cares about baseball? That he doesn't care about human life?
think about it.
August 13, 2007 - 14:19 ET by seekerthink about it. Crichton's expertise is in writing popular novels, not climate science. I wouldn't tout his anti global warming position too much! I know, lets get JK Rowling' opinion.
If J. K. Rowling wrote a
August 13, 2007 - 20:55 ET by MikeBIf J. K. Rowling wrote a book on global warming, and put as much research into it as Crichton did in State of Fear, and documented it as well, then, yes, indeed, I would be interested in her opinion.
Have you read State of Fear? Did you read the papers, articles and books that he cited? Somehow I didn't think so.
On the other hand, let's rely on the opinions of such experts as Al Gore, Leonardo DiCaprio, Cheryl Crow, and Sean Penn. I am sure they are eminently qualified in the field of climatology.
"A communist is someone who reads Marx. An anti-communist is someone who understands Marx." Ronald Reagan
OTOH
August 13, 2007 - 14:43 ET by krismcsherryseeker-- "think about it. Crichton's expertise is in writing popular novels, not climate science. I wouldn't tout his anti global warming position too much! I know, lets get JK Rowling' opinion."
In that sense he's as qualified as Al Gore is on the same issue. Yet people believe Gore like he's God on the matter.
I personally wouldn't discount Crichton so fast. He seems a smart man, has an MD and scifi novel writing requires a great deal of research. You learn a lot of things, pro and con. I admire Crichton for his ability to address the angry political climate in which skeptics have to operate.
As they say at demandebate.com, "I'm more worried about the intellectual climate."
Amen.
As for Ms. Rowling. Don't know. Maybe she would have an informed opinion on climate change. Writing about witches and magic usually doesn't require too much research into real science, however. Just a thought.