“I must admit being somewhat jealous of Bjorn Lomborg. Here’s a man who has managed to create not just a successful career, but something of a global media empire, off the back of nothing more than being consistently and publically wrong.”
From a Greenpeace blog:
Anyway, we’ve just entered the neolombic era, where the key message is –
We shouldn’t try to cut emissions, because the technology isn’t ready.
This succeeds the hopelessly outdated mesolombic position –
We shouldn’t try to cut emissions, because the money is needed elsewhere.
Which itself succeeded the paleolombic position –
We shouldn’t try to cut emissions, because climate change isn’t a big deal.
Which supplanted the short-lived and little-remembered proto-lombic position –
We shouldn’t try to cut emissions, because climate change probably isn’t happening.
Oh no, Snorb, there are many, many others. The jury’s still out.
DUH, They are all based on the silly notion that everyone is not interested in cutting polution. Emmissions are continuously going down
Nothing to do with climate!!!!
The world championship belt for “Being famous for being wrong” has been permanently retired in Paul Ehrlich’s name.
I agree with all of the above statements. They are all correct. What’s the problem? Where’s the error?