Comments on: Geoffrey Lean gets it wrong, again

By: NeilS

NeilS — Sun, 07 Feb 2010 17:04:10 +0000

Andrew,

But will people really change their minds?

Global warming is, in my opinion, just an extension of the kind of arguments Julian Simon was having with John Holdren (now Barrack’s chief science advisor) back in the 80′s. If the greenhouse effect turns out to be not nearly so damaging as some would say, the environmemtalists will start kicking off about some other aspect of human activity – like propogation! Or maybe that’s just me being a cynic.

Global warming has to be fought, and Tim is doing a very good job here, as much on the economics of it as anything else.

By: Tom

Tom — Sat, 06 Feb 2010 14:10:36 +0000

There’s a sixth position you and they missed.

That of someone who started off sceptical and, after reviewing the data, REMAINS sceptical. They seem to assume that believing in climate change is the automatic position after reviewing and that sceptics are either hysterical ‘rejectionists’ or so stupid that they’re still stuck at the first step.

By: Andrew

Andrew — Sat, 06 Feb 2010 09:51:54 +0000

Lean’s argument is a sign that the Malthusians are finally abandoning global warming as their first choice propaganda tool.

Unfortunately the sustainability gravy train now has so many passengers aboard, it’s going to come off the rails very slowly and painfully (for those on board).

But we should welcome an argument about “resources”, once people understand what they really are, they find it quite a revelation (and a relief).

By: DC

DC — Sat, 06 Feb 2010 09:24:53 +0000

I think you’re right but it’s good to see the media narrative changing in places. Whilst Sunny’s Guardian piece earlier in the week still insisted that there are only the two positions which can be held on the debate – the evil denialists and the honourable environmentalists/scientists – much more of the media is accepting that this isn’t an accurate portrayal of the situation.