DominO123 Posted January 27, 2005 Report Share Posted January 27, 2005 (edited) Criticized may be, "most doubtful" is your call. In any case I think you miss the big picture on this one. style_images/master/snapback.png Boghos, in the past Lomborg tried to get his articles published in Nature, and Nature is probably the most serious science magazine. After being reviewed, Nature decided to not published them. If my memory is correct, he finaly was able to get one published after continuess editing and skipping subjects. Lomborg has already admitted many mistakes he did in the book, his work has not only been criticised by environmentalists, but as well serious Economists, lawyers, biologists etc... many intellectuals in different field of science. Statistical manipulation is nothing new, it has been done for years in science, in the pharmaceutical industry it is a common thing to get a drug approved. True, the environmentalist "lobby" is very powerful, but it hardly balances compagnies lobbies that have much much more influence. Lomborg is as well a manipulator when he says he is an environmentalist, he claims being a greenpeace ex-member, while he isn't in the list of greanpeace archives... this is trying to gain a credibility in a field that is not his. Another suggestion of a book. Edited January 27, 2005 by QueBeceR Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arpa Posted January 27, 2005 Report Share Posted January 27, 2005 Chicken Little!! See at the bottom URL. Thousands of years ago CNN there was no CNN then was reporting about global warming and the demise of the dinosaurs. (If one would remember that movie by Marilyn Monroe, the Seven Year Itch, 1950 something, where the entire populationof Manhattan had fled to the mountains to avoid the pre-air condtioning brutal heat.) Some time later the news was about freezing and the Great Ice Age, then a few thousand years after they were broadcasting news about droughts and famines followed by floods and tsunamis when that idiot Noah floated on his surfboard. Once we got over all that there came the problem of overpouluation. When the entire world population was less than that of Indonesia of today Babylonians, alarmed of the rapid increase were building towers to accomodate all the people. Then came the 1960-70 movement of "zero growth", probably by some neurotic old lady who felt crowded by the development next door, when her closest neighbor was only two miles away instead of the accepted 5 miles separation, when the world population was only 4 billion. Alarms were all over warning us that there was no land left to accomodate anymore. World population has almost doubled since then. Yet all those who pressed the panic button during those ages of Ice, Flood and Drought, who live in those "towers of Babel" in Manhattan or downtown LA will keep pressing that button oblivious to the plight of the citizens of North Dakota whose main concern is that there is no sign of life for hundreds of miles be it during the deep frost of the winter or the heat of summer. People who live in Manhattan or LA should drive a few miles to see how Barstow in the Mojave Desert is sizzling in heat while a few miles up Tahoe is being buried in six feet of snow. Tell me about "global warming" when my backyard thermometer reads 8 degrees below zero fahrenheit, that is about 20 degrees below freezing on the Celsius scale. Speaking of exaggeration and panic, has anyone heard of Stakhos Mihran or "cry wolf"?? How about "chicken little" who cried "the sky is falling!!" when a single nut had fallen off the tree. http://www.geocities.com/mjloundy/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DominO123 Posted January 27, 2005 Report Share Posted January 27, 2005 You still hold grudges for that? I meant it in a very nice way. You must be the total opposite of me. I easily forgive and forget. I apologize if it offended you. Look at most of my posts and you will see that the huge majority are not the way you describe it. You are quick to judge and comparmentalize people here. You like to act on your prejudices I assume. You hold a Damocles sword over everbody and strike whenever you feel it is convenient. About environmentalists: my cousin is one of these environmentalists who clearly need help. I have no respect for her. I only respect mainstream environmentalists and can sympathize with their cause if they don't make it a lifestyle out of it. My cousin on the other hand shows a missionary zeal that repulses me. style_images/master/snapback.png How dare you speak of prejudices in a thread where you show being prejudice yourself? I do not call many greenpeacians without any credential "environmentalists." For me an environmentalist is someone whom have the credentials to study nature, many researchers affiliated with universities are example, those are the true "environmtalists" and I dought that as you claimed the majority have mental problems. On the other hand, there are those compagnu sponsered manupulators whom degrade the name of science... but I guess you have nothing to say about these people, when they are those that influence governments the most. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DominO123 Posted January 27, 2005 Report Share Posted January 27, 2005 Tell me about "global warming" when my backyard thermometer reads 8 degrees below zero fahrenheit, that is about 20 degrees below freezing on the Celsius scale. http://www.geocities.com/mjloundy/ style_images/master/snapback.png This is a really dumb comment, sorry to say that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arpa Posted January 27, 2005 Report Share Posted January 27, 2005 This is a really dumb comment, sorry to say that. style_images/master/snapback.png Is it really! It is even dumber to talk about "global warming" when you as a Quebecois and I as an Albanese are having our voriks frozen at subzero temperatures. Get real! Stop listening to the "sky is falling" by "chicken littles" Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DominO123 Posted January 27, 2005 Report Share Posted January 27, 2005 (edited) Is it really! It is even dumber to talk about "global warming" when you as a Quebecois and I as an Albanese are having our voriks frozen at subzero temperatures. Get real! Stop listening to the "sky is falling" by "chicken littles" style_images/master/snapback.png It would be highly egoistic from my part to think of my frozing vorig. Edited January 27, 2005 by QueBeceR Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Arpa Posted January 27, 2005 Report Share Posted January 27, 2005 (edited) has anyone heard of Stakhos Mihran or "cry wolf"?? How about "chicken little" who cried "the sky is falling!!" when a single nut had fallen off the tree. http://www.geocities.com/mjloundy/ style_images/master/snapback.png Speaking of Stakhos (hoviv)Mihran "Cry Wolf", here is what I remember of the ditty. I remember part of it, the rest is reconstructed. Poqrik hoviv m@'n er Mihran Vor amen or dashti vran, Aradzelu k'ertar artun , Poqrik gyughin vochkharnerun. From here on it is all made up by me. Or m@ herou horizoni vran Poqrik shner yerev ekan, Gayl!! Gayl!! gorats anmit Mihran Amboghj gyugh@ hasav vran. Our e gayl@, du zavak shan? Amotits kakhets glukhn iran, Yev aynorits anvanvets ayn Haverzh anmah "Stakhos Mihran". Or m@ irav gayler ekan Hoshotelov vochkharn u garn Voch voq 'matsav poqr Mihran Minj Turq gayl@ misht ankhapan Hasav minjev mer Yerevan. Edited January 27, 2005 by Arpa Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boghos Posted January 27, 2005 Report Share Posted January 27, 2005 Thanks for the book reference, I ad seen it before but never got around to buy it. I see your point, but Lomborg, Momborg, that´s not the point but rather the typical "end of the world" lazy crowd. Arpa has pointed to some instances, fads actually. This is human nature. I have seen so many militants for all kinds of causes being so adamant about what they defended and usually sectarian. But go to their houses and you see how praxis is so different from their rethoric. Nothing new. Look for some articles that yours truly wrote for the McGill Daily in the late 80s...you´ll see what I mean . Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DominO123 Posted January 28, 2005 Report Share Posted January 28, 2005 (edited) I agree, I myself don`t take seriously many "end of the world" screamers and self-proclamed environmentalists. But I think lack of rigor in science works in both ways, there are very professional environmentalist out there(I know some myself), whom professionalism is unquestionable. What is unquestionable is that global warming is real, and there are no serious scientist that deny it, the real question revolve around if whatever or not humans have anything to do with it... after going through many of the data I would tend to believe humans do have an impact but more research has to be done. The real thing is if humans can have an impact, and for this I would tend to say, obviously yes! Many correlations have been found between human activities and domages to the environment, the hole in the ozone layer is entirly of our fault... talking about this, here another example of manipulation of data. Not so long ago, a new study has shown that the acceleration of the deterioration of the ozone layer has been decreasing... and we have seen how some unprofessional scientists have played with the ignorence of the lay man to claim that the ozone layer problem was disapearing. You know like me that a decrease in the acceleration is STILL a variation of the speed, in this case still a positive speed variation. Which mean that the ozone layer is still deteriorating, and that the speed of this deterioration is increasing, since there still is an acceleration... nothing suprising because of the process by which CFCs destroy the O3 molecules. Examples like this, I can give a lot comming from Lomborgs book, this is not being unjustfuly alarmist. If it wasn`t of fanatics like greenpeace, or some environmentalists whos professionalism could be questioned by some, the measures to reduce CFCs would have been never taken and we would have measured an acceleration of an acceleration(positive in both cases) of the deterioration, even the most optimistic previsions in such cases would have been a catastrophic increases of skin cancer. I will conclude by saying that it is not because there are exagerations from some fanatics that it justify unprofessionalism from people like Lomberg. Lomberg is worthing all the attacks he get, all of them after what he has done. He has manipulated other specialists data whom later answered Lomberg and exposed the "real thing." In my sense this man was a good businessman that knew how to make money by getting published a work like this that has been a bestseller and published in many languages. He knew that both sides will buy his book, he knew all the noises it would make, he knew that many will get his work. He was very successful. But in my book, he shall remain an unprofessional scientist for having manipulated data like he has done. Lomberg is the Justin McCarthy of environmental studies. Edited January 28, 2005 by QueBeceR Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boghos Posted January 28, 2005 Report Share Posted January 28, 2005 Lomberg is the Justin McCarthy of environmental studies. style_images/master/snapback.png I couldn´t think of a worse qualification... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.