 |
 |
Here's an article about Lomborg. Seems his peers in Denmark smell something rotten (oh, come on! I had to do it.) Interesting that the panel felt, as I do, that Lomborg's failure to cite common source which do not necessarily agree with him is/was suspicious. However I am a bit aghast that Lomborg was actually appointed to a position of authority on any environmental issue. Steven Danish panel says controversial book not scientific Wednesday, January 08, 2003 The Associated Press COPENHAGEN, Denmark - A Danish panel of scientists said Tuesday that a controversial book challenging the sacred cows of the environmental movement was not a scientific publication. In his 2001 best seller, "The Skeptical Environmentalist," Danish statistician Bjoern Lomborg said concerns about melting ice caps, deforestation, acid rain were exaggerated. He claimed that the global environmental situation was not deteriorating. The book was translated into a dozen languages and generated criticism from environmentalists worldwide. The Danish Committees on Scientific Dishonesty said the 350-page book "is clearly in violation of the norms for good scientific behavior." The agency reviewed the book after complaints from four scientists, including Stuart Pimm, an ecologist at the Center for Environmental Research and Conservation at Columbia University in New York. He did not immediately return a call from The Associated Press. Hans Henrik Brydensholt, the panel's chairman, said Lomborg did not make "thorough searches for all available sources ... including what goes against one's supposition. ...He used sources in favor of his own beliefs," he said. Lomborg acknowledged Tuesday that he may not have always quoted all available sources, but said the panel failed to provide any examples of the alleged unfairness, he said. "I have never tried to hide that I wasn't an environment specialist," Lomborg said, adding his book was meant to start a debate on the environment. The ruling didn't include any penalty, but opponents of the Liberal-Conservative government said it was an indicator that Lomborg shouldn't have been named director of the national Environmental Assessment Institute, which monitors the use by state agencies of public funds aimed at cutting pollution. "Bjoern Lomborg is a provocative environmental debater (and) he should be allowed to be that," said Pernille Blach Hansen of the opposition Social Democrats. "The problem is that he and the government have presented him as something he is not: namely a scientist." A former member of Greenpeace, Lomborg has argued that a solution to pollution is more likely to be found in economic and technological progress than in the policies advocated by many environmentalist organizations. Copyright 2003, Associated Press All Rights Reserved