A climate-change denier comes in from the cold

global-warming-unbeliever-fail.jpg

Hello and welcome to reality, Bjørn Lomborg. What took you so long?

Bjørn Lomborg, the self-styled “sceptical environmentalist” once compared to Adolf Hitler by the UN’s climate chief, is famous for attacking climate scientists, campaigners, the media and others for exaggerating the rate of global warming and its effects on humans, and the costly waste of policies to stop the problem.

But in a new book to be published next month, Lomborg will call for tens of billions of dollars a year to be invested in tackling climate change. “Investing $100bn annually would mean that we could essentially resolve the climate change problem by the end of this century,” the book concludes.

Examining eight methods to reduce or stop global warming, Lomborg and his fellow economists recommend pouring money into researching and developing clean energy sources such as wind, wave, solar and nuclear power, and more work on climate engineering ideas such as “cloud whitening” to reflect the sun’s heat back into the outer atmosphere.

In a Guardian interview, he said he would finance investment through a tax on carbon emissions that would also raise $50bn to mitigate the effect of climate change, for example by building better sea defences, and $100bn for global healthcare.

His declaration about the importance of action on climate change comes at a crucial point in the debate, with international efforts to agree a global deal on emissions stalled amid a resurgence in scepticism caused by rows over the reliability of the scientific evidence for global warming.

Not that I’m not glad to hear that he’s had a change of heart, and not a minute too soon. The solutions he proposes (other than the iffy cloud-tinkering one) are also sound, if this brief summation is true. I only wonder if it’s actually already too late.

Well, anyway, welcome to the fold, Bjørn. I’m sure your namesake animals are glad to hear it, too.

polar-bear.jpg

Facebooktwitterredditpinterestlinkedinmail
This entry was posted in Environmentally Ill. Bookmark the permalink.

6 Responses to A climate-change denier comes in from the cold

  1. Manaat says:

    Okay, so Franklin Brito is dead, RIP.

  2. Yeah. The man who starved to extort the Venezuelan government is now a self-made martyr. I hope those who egged that poor lunatic on are happy.

  3. Slave Revolt says:

    Opprotunist alert!
    Follow the money. Everyone needs to eat, and I would bet that this fuck has a ferocious appetite.
    Crapitalist cultures are rife with these types.
    What they won’t point up is the diseased nature of capitalism, nor the commodity fetishism that disconnects human identification within the ecosystemic loop–from which we are never seperate from, despite the well entrenched delusional patterns that undergird the problematic, and pathetic conceptualization of “self”.
    Nothing to see here, folks, move along.

  4. David Jenson says:

    warming and cooling trends believe it or not are natural cycles the planet goes through with or without humankind there to regulate it. of course its not really about climate at all change is it?? its all about money and power, minuite after minuite, hour after hour… It’s so the UN can redirect welth to third world countries ran by piece of shit warlords

  5. Wow, what logic. You floored me there, man.
    In case you haven’t noticed, all the measures discussed in the article were NOT about redirecting “welth” to “third world countries ran by piece of shit warlords”, they were about protecting the DEVELOPED world from the inevitable effects of its own greed and stupidity.
    But if it consoles you to believe in your own bullshit, go right ahead. May you drown in it. Just don’t plan on taking the rest of the world with you.
    PS: How’s the weather in Odessa, Texas, this year? Hot enough for ya? Don’t worry, it’ll get hotter.

  6. Wren says:

    Yeah, David, thousands of independent climate scientists from almost every country on the planet are all colluding to falsify climate data so the U.N. can take your money and give it to “warlords.” vs. CO2, a proven greenhouse gas, expelled into the atmosphere by the trillions of tons through the burning of fossil fuels is warming the planet. Which theory has the most assumptions? Occam’s razor, look it up.

Comments are closed.