After I discussed Lomborg’s latest book about climate change in my previous post, it came to my attention that there is a website dedicated to its flaws at http://www.lomborg-errors.dk/ . Initially I was very concerned because it indeed shows some very serious issues about the book and Lomborg’s methods in general.
Upon closer inspection however, it turns out that the critique completely misses the point. The same goes for Ackermans paper ‘Hot, It’s Not – Reflections on Cool It!, by Bjorn Lomborg‘ and the other critics that I’ve been able to find so far.
What they are not seeing, is that Lomborg is proposing a paradigm shift. Or at the very least, they don’t understand the paradigm shift. I demonstrate this later on, but let me first explain this new paradigm. Please pay attention, as paradigm shifts tend to be hard to get if you are not used to them.
- A new paradigm for looking at climate change? (part 1)
- Introduction to the new paradigm
- How to properly use this paradigm in your critique of Lomborg
- Debunking Cool It Critique (part 2)
- My personal take home messages from Cool It
- How bad are Lomborg’s Errors?
- Polar bears
- Heat and Cold deaths
- Melting glaciers
- Sea level rise
- Hurricanes and extremes
- Final score Lomborg versus Fog
- What’s with the precautionary principle? (part 3)
- What about Ackermans paper?
- The organizational perspective