Lomborg yet again tries to mislead on SLR, gets taken to the woodshed by Rahmstorf

Lomborg is at it again, taking to the pages of The Guardian in an attempt to downplay the seriousness of sea level rise and denigrate the upcoming Climate Change Congress. Stefan Rahmstorf completely demolishes Lomborg, and his response is well worth reading in full.

I don’t have much to add- I discussed how dishonest Lomborg was being on SLR and the IPCC back in August of last year- but I did want to point out the chutzpah the Dane displays in accusing Rahmstorf of cherry-picking the time series to exploit 1998 (which Lomborg has been doing consistently and incorrectly for temp) when Lomborg’s entire argument about recent SLR being “low” is based upon picking the period that gives the lowest possible trend.

What Lomborg lacks in factual accuracy and integrity and he more than makes up for in shamelessness.

I wonder how much more of this Lomborg’s “reputation” can endure before he finds himself out of favor among the right wing, market fundamentalist front groups he is so cozy with.

About these ads

6 responses to “Lomborg yet again tries to mislead on SLR, gets taken to the woodshed by Rahmstorf

  1. What a bunch of prats you lot are. Rahmstorf is an egoist pushing a political agenda along with his boss from Potsdam, Schellnhuber.

    [First and only warning: Drive-by, baseless accusations that don't even attempt to rebut points in question will be considered spam and marked as such. Why not explain why you think Rahmstorf's data/arguments are incorrect? -TB]

  2. Looks rather like Lomborg has successfully completed his mission. News from the Climate Congress
    “Global temperatures ‘will rise 6C this century’”
    http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/environment/article5882341.ece#cid=OTC-RSS&attr=3392178
    Developments in sea level rise projections are also discussed. How much worse does this get?

    ['will rise 6C this century' *if* nothing is done about emissions. There is still time (though less and less) to make significant emissions reductions. Throwing one's hands up in resignation to doom is not a viable position from my perspective. -TB]

  3. Interestingly, Rahmstorf actually took a time-out in his presentation to the climate congress in Copenhagen today – to chastise Lomborg in front of the assembled media… used an example of his cherry-picking data and how he misrepresented it in one of his columns, and contrasted to the full data set… He appealed to the press exercise care in their presentation of climate issues to the public… The presentations are online here. (See Part 2, and then you can skip directly to Rahmstorf. The discussion on Lomborg is roughly 49:30 to 52:00. At which point he then says – “Let’s get back to the real science” – and does.)

    [Rahmstorf handled that in a very professional, understated manner. It was even more effective than actually attacking Lomborg (for those who haven't watched, he doesn't actually say Lomborg's name, although he does display it). Thanks for pointing that out, I hadn't had the opportunity to watch the webcasts yet. -TB]

  4. I didn’t mean to imply we’re all doomed (unless we fail to undertake timely mitigation – then all bets are off, and 6°C or more appears to be a real possibility, which is a significant increase over the view of a couple years ago). But I am getting the impression that the new consensus is tending toward the view that the possibility of somehow staying under 2°C is now in the rear view mirror. I can only assume that Lomborg is being very well compensated (including via ego inflation) to so glibly remain in an alternate universe – it’s hardly like he’s unfamiliar with the science (he has to be pretty familiar to twist it to his purposes).

  5. Lomorg is a puzzle to me, but- as I noted at Jr’s in the posts where Yohe takes Lomborg to task – Lomborg clearly plays dishonest games with his Copenhagen Consensus that detract from solutions to climate change, even from Lomborg’s own proposal for massive government investments in technology:

    http://mises.org/Community/blogs/tokyotom/archive/2008/09/04/lomborg-misapplies-the-quot-copenhagen-consensus-quot-to-ignore-carbon-pricing-and-yet-argue-for-massive-government-investments-in-clean-energy.aspx

  6. Pingback: Bjorn Lomborg admits his intellectual bankruptcy « Greenfyre’s

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s