Well, said, Steve,
Its accuracy aside, for the moment, let us respond to the question:
"If the Lomborg book is indeed factually challenged and
intentionally (or incompetently) produced to further a rhetorical
perspective, or intended to distort, then what is its ethical status and
that of its author?"
To find listmembers' input on that ethical question was my intention
when I posted the original message, an appropriate question for this
audience, I should think. I am interested to know what members of this list
think of the ethical implications of such publication, rather than the more
basic question of its provenance. (That will be established, one way or the
other, as the environmental scientists weigh in, I should think.)
-Tc
Anthony R. S. Chiaviello, Ph.D.
Assistant Professor, Professional Writing
Department of English
University of Houston-Downtown
One Main Street
Houston, TX 77002-0001
713.221.8520 / 713.868.3979
"Question Reality"
> ----------
> From: Steven Bissell[SMTP:[log in to unmask]]
> Sent: Thursday, December 13, 2001 5:30 PM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: FW: "The Skeptical Environmentalist"
>
> I've read more about Lomborg's book on the environmental lists than
> anywhere
> else. Has anyone on this list actually read the thing? I took a stab at
> Easterbrook's book a couple of years ago, but it was so full of errors
> (starting with the cover that showed an invasive species of maple) that I
> got discouraged. Easterbrook's book ended up with the prediction that loss
> of biodiversity was not really a big issue because soon we'd (Homo sapiens
> that is) be going to other planets and terraforming them. I still have a
> copy of "Green Delusions" which is more of a critique of environmental
> organizations than environmental issues.
>
> Steven
>
> But the proper response to this hypothesis
> is that there are always people willing to
> believe anything, however implausible, merely
> in order to be contrary.
> Vikram Seth
> A Suitable Boy
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Discussion forum for environmental ethics.
> [mailto:[log in to unmask]]On Behalf Of Chiaviello, Anthony
> Sent: Thursday, December 13, 2001 4:00 PM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: FW: "The Skeptical Environmentalist"
>
>
> Well, the links will get you to more information on the book and let you
> evaluate the opinions of "opinion leaders." There are already a number of
> such books that have distorted environmental science, if those who condemn
> it are right about this book. Not having read it, as you say, it is unfair
> for me to condemn it, but here is another comment from the Enviro Comm.
> Network list, and I know and trust the source, Kent Goshorn (PhD.
> Annenberg
> School):
>
> There is in fact a long line of these books, going
> back at least to Sir John Maddox's "The Doomsday
> Syndrome" in 1972. Population expert Julian Simon
> as published two or three compendiums, and of course
> Gregg Easterbrook's "A Moment on Earth" earned him
> a regular slot on the News Hour and elsewhere as the
> journalist's enviro-skeptic. Some of them are just
> conservative "battle books" that no one reads but which
> get quoted by DC think tanks; occasionally one catches
> on with the media. Cf. Lomborg (?), the Wise Use
> movement found quite a bit of support in the Scandanavian
> countries, mostly on the whaling issue. Once enlisted on
> a single cause, "anti" groups and authors typically start
> speaking out on a range of issues. -- Kent Goshorn
>
> I believe the Lomborg book is probably from the same tradition, judging
> from
> the comments of some reputable sources.
> -Tc
> Anthony R. S. Chiaviello, Ph.D.
> Assistant Professor, Professional Writing
> Department of English
> University of Houston-Downtown
> One Main Street
> Houston, TX 77002-0001
> 713.221.8520 / 713.868.3979
> "Question Reality"
>
> > ----------
> > From: Jim Tantillo[SMTP:[log in to unmask]]
> > Sent: Thursday, December 13, 2001 4:50 PM
> > To: [log in to unmask]
> > Subject: Re: FW: "The Skeptical Environmentalist"
> >
> > Careful there Tony. Best not to form an opinion until one has read the
> > book methinks. There was an excerpt/chapter from Lomborg (a
> statistician)
> > published in the Chronicle of Higher Ed. last month, and many of the
> folks
> > that I know who read it thought it looked solid. The authors at Tom
> > Paine.com might disagree with his conclusions--for that matter, I might
> as
> > well--but I think it's unfair of you to imply that Lomborg has "the
> > apparent intention of misleading people about the environment." How do
> you
> > know that? Have you read the book? the excerpt in the Chronicle? If
> not,
> > then I'd be careful about editorializing much beyond passing on the link
> > to us (which I do appreciate as I've been following the reception of the
> > book). Here, it is difficult to get the book as the library has not
> > received its copy yet, and I am generally unwilling to buy a book until
> > the "dust settles" and the reviews are in. It may turn out that
> Lomborg's
> > book isn't reliable, but I just don't think enough people have read it
> yet
> > to know that for sure. And it impresses me not one bit that Grist
> > Magazine commissions E.O. Wilson or Norman Myers to do "analysis" of the
> > book. (In some ways, that makes me question Grist magazine and
> > TomPaine.com the same way you're questioning Lomborg. To each his own.
> > <s> ) I think it best to keep an open mind until one has read the book,
> > no?
> >
> > Of course this is related to our discussion this week of Wildavsky, and
> of
> > other "skeptical environmentalist" books in the past . . . Martin
> Lewis's
> > Green Delusions comes to mind. I just get a little nervous with the
> > passing on of links and such a hasty intention about an author's
> "apparent
> > intentions."
> >
> > jt
> >
> >
> > From another list - what about the ethics of writing & publishing
> > apparently
> >
> > erroneous information with the apparent intention of misleading
> > people about
> > the environment?
> > -Tc
> > Anthony R. S. Chiaviello, Ph.D.
> > Assistant Professor, Professional Writing
> > Department of English
> > University of Houston-Downtown
> > One Main Street
> > Houston, TX 77002-0001
> > 713.221.8520 / 713.868.3979
> > "Question Reality"
> >
> > > ----------
> > > From: john delicath[SMTP:[log in to unmask]]
> > > Sent: Wednesday, December 12, 2001 11:03 PM
> > > To: [log in to unmask]
> > > Subject: "The Skeptical Environmentalist"
> > >
> > > More good stuff to use to in teaching your environmental
> > > communication courses about: rhetoric and the public sphere;
> > > argumentation and evidence in environmental controversies;
> > > counter-science; environmental opposition discourses;
> > environmental
> > > matters and the mass media, etc
> > > best,
> > > JD
> > >
> > > DUPED BY "The Skeptical Environmentalist"
> > >
> > > The New York Times, Washington Post,
> > > The Economist and Others Got Suckered
> > >
> > > Bjorn Lomborg's new book, "The Skeptical Environmentalist," says
> > the
> > > Earth's environment is getting better, not worse. Don't fret
> over
> > ozone
> > > depletion, species extinction, or acid rain, Lomborg says. Pesky
> > > environmentalists are using bad science to scare us.
> > >
> > > A NEW YORK TIMES writer called the book, "a substantial work of
> > > analysis." A WASHINGTON POST reviewer gushed over Lomborg's
> > "magnificent
> > > achievement." THE ECONOMIST, TIME INTERNATIONAL, THE CHICAGO
> > TRIBUNE and
> > > many other respected publications swallowed the book whole,
> > legitimized
> > > it, and made it a hit.
> > >
> > > But the supposedly skeptical press got suckered by the Danish
> > author.
> > > Find out how at TomPaine.com.
> > >
> > > READ OUR OP AD...
> >
> > > http://www.TomPaine.com/opad
> > >
> > >
> > > AND READ THESE OP-AD FEATURES...
> > >
> > >
> > > THE TABLOID ENVIRONMENTALIST
> > > How a Pseudo-Scientist Duped the Big Media -- Big Time
> > > by Colin Woodard for TomPaine.com
> > > "Here's one guy taking on a whole spectrum of issues, who
> has
> > never
> > > written a paper on any of them, and is in opposition to
> absolutely
> > > everyone in the field, Nobel Prize winners and all. It ought to
> > have
> > > raised some red flags."
> >
> > > http://www.tompaine.com/news/2001/12/07/index.html
> >
> > >
> > >
> > > SOMETHING IS ROTTEN IN THE STATE OF DENMARK
> > > A skeptical look at "The Skeptical Environmentalist"
> > > GristMagazine.com commissioned an extensive series of
> reviews
> > of
> > > Lomborg's book by leading scientists. The series is a
> devestating
> > > rebuttal, and shows just how badly the media got duped. Here's
> > your
> > > guide -- with links -- to the series.
> >
> > > http://www.tompaine.com/features/2001/12/11/1.html
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > John Delicath
> > > Assistant Professor, Department of Communication
> > > Research Associate, Center for Environmental Communication
> Studies
> > > University of Cincinnati
> > > (513) 556-4442
> > > [log in to unmask]
> > >
> >
> >
> >
>
|
