tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10348701.post8662310919021243153..comments2024-03-13T21:26:03.011-07:00Comments on Right on the Left Coast: Views From a Conservative Teacher: Bjorn Lomborg on Global WarmingDarrenhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15730642770935985796noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10348701.post-60543720535967154262007-03-25T18:02:00.000-07:002007-03-25T18:02:00.000-07:00Oh yeah, Lomborg's an economist. Prices, costs, ma...Oh yeah, Lomborg's an economist. <BR/><BR/>Prices, costs, markets, etc. are his specialty and that's where his voice carries some weight. Outside the area of economics his opinions are just as worthwhile or not, as the next person's.<BR/><BR/>The cost of all the myriad enviro proposals are what got him started in this and related enviro-oriented issues. But having gotten into the issue he was moved to reveal some of the less talked about well-springs of various enviro articles of faith. <BR/><BR/>As an economist the thrust of his argument is that the various <I>human</I> resources that can be brought to bear on a problem are finite. That being the case Lomborg is just framing the debate in terms of determining which problem is most amenable to solution while posing the greatest danger. <BR/><BR/><I>That's</I> the problem we ought to attack first since we're much more likely to solve it.<BR/><BR/>But that sort of pragmatism doesn't set too well in the enviro community. In the enviro community every problem has to get emergency priority and every available resource has to be committed to the solution. It doesn't matter whether by solving one problem, or even attempting too, you make the solution of other problems impossible.<BR/><BR/>That, in a nutshell, is Lomborg's central position. Everything else has had to do with the epidemic tendentiousness common among enviro activists and Mr. Lomborg's refusal to bury the evidence of the lies.allenmhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02892084607361361603noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10348701.post-36215512733221871032007-03-25T17:51:00.000-07:002007-03-25T17:51:00.000-07:00If Gore's recommendations will cost so little mayb...If Gore's recommendations will cost so little maybe he could lead by example. As it is the only example he's setting is for the hypocrites of the world and I'm not even referring to his jetting around to tell everyone to stop jetting around. The son-of-a-bitch lives in a house that uses more electricity in a month then the average house does in a year. <BR/><BR/>Let the doctor partake of his own prescription.allenmhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02892084607361361603noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10348701.post-35084706891060549432007-03-23T10:01:00.000-07:002007-03-23T10:01:00.000-07:00You obviously didn't spend 20 minutes reading what...You obviously didn't spend 20 minutes reading what he said to Congress.Darrenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15730642770935985796noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10348701.post-60670638419320496272007-03-23T08:41:00.000-07:002007-03-23T08:41:00.000-07:00"No big deal?" Even when you've just quoted, from..."No big deal?" Even when you've just quoted, from Bjorn himself, that it is "a serious problem"? You agree with any criticism he has of current liberal policy, but when he talks about global warming being real, you ignore it. The stuff that Al Gore is recommending in <I>An Inconvenient Truth</I> is not going to cost billions. It's stuff that will cut down on our own energy bills, while at the same time doing our share in helping the environment.<BR/>Personally, I absolutely believe that more money should be spent in R&D than in enforcing loosely-researched regulations. It would help, however, if the Bush administration would help out with any such programs. Their earlier hydrogen research has been limited to hydrogen concept vehicles and the extraction of hydrogen from fossil fuels, which is hardly environmental. More money can be saved on energy once more is spent.Cameronhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17066673639768608021noreply@blogger.com