The Lomborg war

[Gordon Fitch]

"Gordon Fitch": 
> I meant to note, but forgot, that Lomborg recieved a
> four-author trashing in the most recent issue of the
> _Scientific_American_.  The heavy artillery has
> definitely been called in.  To recall Uncle Albert,
> you'd think one would have been enough.

Ian Murray:
> Yeah, well considering the right-wing heavyweights that
> endorsed the book, perhaps it was necessary. Hopefully it
> will lead to greater politcal radicalization of scientists
> willing to hear left arguments.....

I don't see why.  Lomborg's book takes a position in a struggle
between bourgeois factions.  I think I pointed out before that
unlike most supposedly leftish issues, environmentalism appeals
to the bourgeois, the well-off, the authoritarian.  Or at
least some aspects of it do.  As long as you can get a really
good job being an environmentalist, I don't see how it's going
to radicalize anybody.  The most beneficial outcome I can see
resulting from Lomborg's book will be a return of attention
to physical data (as opposed to simulations and guesswork)
which (as I noted before) was missing from public argument in
several areas, like global warming and population.

-- Gordon