Posted on 01/11/2003 12:55:26 PM PST by freepatriot32
Burn, Baby Bjorn, Burn!
Did you see where the Greens in Denmark have burned Bjorn Lomborg at the stake? A Danish institution with a deeply impressive (even pluralized!) name stenciled on its door, The Committees on Scientific Dishonesty, has reviewed Lomborg's book, The Skeptical Environmentalist, a statistical inquiry into the claims of Wild Environmentalism, and has made its pronouncement. Having examined the complaints against Lomborg, the Committees placed the Wig of Judiciousness on its head and lit the straw at the Danish statistician's feet.
"Objectively speaking," the Committees intoned, "the publication of the work under consideration is deemed to fall within the concept of scientific dishonesty."
It's interesting to observe how impressively Denmark resolves issues of science that arise within its borders: by pronouncement. This saves a lot of time that is otherwise wasted on observation, experiment, analysis, and debate. The "pronouncement" business has a long and distinguished history, of course, having served the Counter-Reformation Church so well in its own battle against heresy, and Stalinist science so effectively in its campaign in support of Lysenkoism. Nor is there any reason to question the disinterestedness of such Committees, since their own witness to their own objectivity is so conveniently placed within their own pronouncement.
Most impressive of all, however, is the manner with which this process has approached the question of evidence. What instances of Lomborg's dishonesty have the Committees cited in support of their pronouncement? This is where they've covered themselves with glory. Evidence is beneath the Committees' contempt; they've cited none. That would have opened the door to a rebuttal on the merits. Why be bothered?
The Economist calls this process Orwellian, incompetent, and shameful, while Tech Central Station says it's a smear. Even so, Lomborg says it makes him uncomfortable, and who can blame him? Lomborg may have the statistical case on his side (the Danish Committees sure didn't put a dent in it), but that can be small comfort when one is up against a well-publicized charge from a body with an impressive name.
What Lomborg needs are other sorts of pronouncements from other self-important bodies located in appropriate nations. That is why I'm so pleased today to report the findings of the Committees on Discovering Moral Fraudulence Masquerading as Something Else. These Committees do business in Freedonia, a nation established decades ago by the Marx Brothers and therefore bringing exactly the desired sensibility to the campaign against Lomborg. Why should these Committees' pronouncements be taken seriously? Because its members are in possession of an impressive set of judicial wigs. Having placed those wigs askew on their heads, the Freedonian Ministers of Pronouncements have denounced the Danish Committees as a collection of "schnorrers," have refused to lend them any more money, and are even refusing to return the Danes' door stencils, deposited in Freedonia as collateral.
Additionally, the Committees on Saying McCarthyism in Danish have weighed in. This group is based in Ruritania, a ludicrous monarchy that figures prominently in the forgotten novels of Arthur Hope. Ruritania is an excellent location to debate Lomborg's critics, because it is a place best known for the extravagance of its military epaulettes. Consistent with their national reputation for impenetrable intrigue, the Ruritanian Committees have dressed up to look exactly like the Danish Committees in question, and have issued a counter-statement in the Danish language that pretends to be the work of the Danish Committees itself. That document demands that Denmark's royal family wear more epaulette braids while riding their bicycles. The smirk on the faces of the Ruritanian imposters at their press conference suggests that there is a good deal more to their conspiracy, but that by the time we turn the last page of the story it will be next to impossible to reconstruct what actually happened.
Finally, the Committees on Pronouncing Pronouncements, based in Pyongyang, North Korea, reports that it intends to buy yet another two-page spread of The New York Times. There, they will print, in 6-point type, the text of a speech begun several days ago by their unique head of state, and still going on. The ad will, as usual, declare socialism's inevitable victory, and cite as evidence the Danish Committees' appropriation of North Korea's scientific methods.
Perhaps none of these developments will reduce Bjorn Lomborg's understandable unhappiness, but it will at least place the Danish Committees' pronouncements in a context befitting their seriousness.
Alright...Fetch...THE COMFY CHAIR!
On the one hand, as scientists we are ethically bound to the scientific method, in effect promising to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but - which means that we must include all the doubts, the caveats, the ifs, ands and buts. On the other hand, we are not jus t scientists but human beings as well. And like most people, we'd like to see the world a better place, which in this context translates into our working to reduce the risk of potentially disastrous climate change. To do that, we need to get some broad-based support, to capture the public's imagination. That, of co urse, entails getting loads of media coverage. So we have to offer up scary scenarios, make simplified, dramat ic statements, and make little mention of any doubts we might have. ? Each of us has to decide what the right balance is between being effective and being honest."
Source: A Smear Continues
http://www.techcentralstation.com/1051/envirowrapper.jsp?PID=1051-450&CID=1051-010803F
The above URL maps to the hotlink above it.
Because they can't refute the facts that Lomborg printed in his book.
From The Skeptical Environmentalist, by Bjorn Lomborg
"We have more leisure time, greater security, less pollution, fewer accidents, more education, more amenities, higher incomes, and fewer starving people than any other generation in history."The truth hurts, and the bit dogs are howling."For less than one year's cost of meeting Kyoto," he said, "we could provide systems for clean drinking water that would save 2 million lives a year."
"…The Worldwatch Institute has claimed that the world's forests have 'declined significantly' in recent decades. In fact, the longest data series, gathered by a United Nations agency, shows that global forest cover grew between 1950 and 1994. In particular, the institute noted, Canada is loosing 200,000 hectares of forest a year." On checking the quoted source, Mr. Lomborg finds that Canada's forests grew by 174,000 hectares a year.
This is representative: the book exposes countless errors, evasions, and distortions of this sort.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.