--- Deborah Harrell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > http://www.cnn.com/2003/TECH/science/01/10/denmark.environment.ap/ > > "In his 2001 book, "The Skeptical Environmentalist," > Danish statistician Bjoern Lomborg said concerns > about > melting ice caps, deforestation, acid rain were > exaggerated. He claimed that the global > environmental > situation was not deteriorating.
This whole situation has been extremely troubling, and greatly damages the credibility of the environmental sciences community in my eyes, I'm very sorry to say. First, Lomborg's defense of his work: http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110002949 Critics of the environmental movement often argue that the science itself is biased because a combination of political pressure, environmental fervor, and funding pressures cause environmental scientists to consistently come to "Green" conclusions. Until this travesty I had enough faith in the scientific community to reject those arguments as a bad joke. I don't, anymore. Jonah Goldberg had an interesting column in National Review on this subject: http://www.nationalreview.com/goldberg/goldberg011303.asp His point - that distortions in favor of so-called environmental causes are welcomed by the community, but that even a balanced argument - and Lomborg's book strikes me as quite balanced - that contradicts the accepted wisdom of environmental catastrophe will be suppressed - seems to be borne out by these events. The credibility of the scientific community is one of the most valuable assets the world has - squandering it in this way is a crime and a tragedy. Gautam __________________________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now. http://mailplus.yahoo.com _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
