"Andre Jute" wrote in message
...


David Looser wrote:
"Andre Jute" wrote in message
...


Bjorn Lomborg, author of The Skeptical Environmentalist, who had his
career ruined for exposing the lies of the environmental lobby.


Or the man who gained fame and book sales from telling businessmen,
politicians and the public what they wanted to hear.

The man who pointed out that the official statistics do not support
the doomsaying of the environmentalists, that therefore they have no
right to claim that global warming is a scientifically based fear.

Who are these "environmentalists"?. There are a lot of scientist involved in
environmental research these days, and no, they don't all agree with each
other, far from it. There is a consensus (fully supported by the statistics)
that the world is getting warmer, indeed recent statistics suggest that the
process may be happening even faster than had been predicted. The recent
summer loss of arctic sea ice, unprecedented in historical time, exceeded
expectations.

One simple example. If you have the Gore video,

I'm not really interested in the Gore video. He's not a scientist and is a
Johnny-come-lately to the environmental field.

That's all
the proof we need that we had a lucky escape that the moron Gore
wasn't elected to the hot seat in Washington.

Instead we got the moron Bush. Mr "the US economy is more important than the
global environment", and Mr "let's invade Iraq while we can use 9/11 as an
excuse" Bush. Gore couldn't have been worse.

I first called the bull**** of these people bull**** when still in my
teens I wrote a newspaper column that never failed to mention the hole
in the ozone layer -- that they then earnestly assured us would cause
the world to FREEZE.

WHO "earnestly assured us it would cause the world to FREEZE"? I've read
plenty about the ozone hole, never have I heard that one before.

Nobody ever explained why the same hysterical
dumbos next hysterically misinterpreted some shortterm trends in
temperature rise and started forecasting that we would all die in the
HEATSTORM. In 1973 in the middle of the Oil Recession, I pointed out
that the world had 440 years of oil left,

You pointed that out? Where did you get that data from? Not even the most
head-in-the-sand estimates that I have seen have suggested anything like
that amount.


That's what Lomborg did. He looked it up instead of just being an
impressionable, credulous fool like you.

You can call me "an impressionable, credulous fool" if you like. It seems a
seriously over-the-top reaction to my expressing some doubt about your
version of what happened to Lomberg. Lomberg is a propagandist. Sure he's
good at making the stats appear to support his case, but then so do his
opponents.

Andre "Show me the numbers" Jute
God, I love statistics (for separating the fools from the survivors)

Statistics are only as good as the science behind them. Even then they can
be presented in a partial way so as to give a inaccurate picture, in this
field both sides accuse the other of doing this. I see no more reason to
believe Lomberg than I do those he criticises, who are just as able as he is
to use the stats to support their case as he is. Unless you have real,
hands-on, knowledge of what you are talking about (and I thought you were
something to do with audio, not an environmental scientist) your opinion
means no more than mine.

David.