Danish panel says controversial book not scientific ("The Skeptical Environmentalist")

COPENHAGEN, Denmark — A Danish panel of scientists said Tuesday that a controversial book challenging the sacred cows of the environmental movement was not a scientific publication. In his 2001 best seller, "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. The book was translated into a dozen languages and generated criticism from environmentalists worldwide.

The Danish Committees on Scientific Dishonesty said the 350-page book "is clearly in violation of the norms for good scientific behavior." The agency reviewed the book after complaints from four scientists, including Stuart Pimm, an ecologist at the Center for Environmental Research and Conservation at Columbia University in New York. He did not immediately return a call from The Associated Press.

Hans Henrik Brydensholt, the panel's chairman, said Lomborg did not make "thorough searches for all available sources ... including what goes against one's supposition. ...He used sources in favor of his own beliefs," he said.

Lomborg acknowledged Tuesday that he may not have always quoted all available sources, but said the panel failed to provide any examples of the alleged unfairness, he said. "I have never tried to hide that I wasn't an environment specialist," Lomborg said, adding his book was meant to start a debate on the environment.

The ruling didn't include any penalty, but opponents of the Liberal-Conservative government said it was an indicator that Lomborg shouldn't have been named director of the national Environmental Assessment Institute, which monitors the use by state agencies of public funds aimed at cutting pollution.

"Bjoern Lomborg is a provocative environmental debater (and) he should be allowed to be that," said Pernille Blach Hansen of the opposition Social Democrats. "The problem is that he and the government have presented him as something he is not: namely a scientist."

A former member of Greenpeace, Lomborg has argued that a solution to pollution is more likely to be found in economic and technological progress than in the policies advocated by many environmentalist organizations.

Spin control from the leftist wackos. I am all for being intelligent on environmental issues myself, but these freaks would rather the planet exist without us in it. It is here for our use - and we will not be the ones to destory it. Most likely the sun will burn out, a meteorite will toast us, mass volcanoes, etc. We need to use the resources of the earth now to develop ways to get off this rock.

The article has within its word choice unambiguous proof of the subject perspective of the Dane as contrasted with the citizen perspective of an American. Note the "He should be allowed to - -". An American would assume the person could say what he wished.

One must marvel at a culture capable of assuming they can determine scientific truth with a board. Science has hypotheses which are verified by experiment.

Truths are available at the church down the street. While politicians & lawyers count heads via votes or precident, non-Danish scientists test and verify.

That board is one small step from the Roman with chicken entrails before him.

The Skeptical Environmentalist is an amazing book. I strongly recommend that people read it and make up their own minds.

Check out the author's web site, where he has a great deal of fun with his critics.

In the meantime, I will only note that virtually all Lomberg's sources draw on environmentalists themselves, because they are the people who collect the raw data he uses.

Lomberg is not really a conservative, and I think he'd be appalled if you call him one. He's simply an honest man who recognizes that the sky isn't falling quite yet.

The worst air pollution I've experienced all last year was during my trip to Cuba, where exhaust belching 1950s cars, Soviet Ladas and ancient school busses all do their part. Compared to that, the San Fernando Valley of Los Angeles is clean as a whistle. This is quite remarkable considering that Cuba's sea breezes should have dispersed pollutants, while the Valley is surrounded by mountain ranges and therefore does not have that advantage at all.

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.