Juliet Jowet writes an article for the Observer. I am not sure where that is from or where the article is placed in the Observer, but it can be accessed under Carnivore Conservation News under the section Ursid (bear).
Lomborg does agree that Global Warming is occuring, and that is where the action should happen.
I think for many reasons we should weane ourselves (USA) of fossil fuels, not the least are its prospective and probable impacts on the issue of Global Warming and the plausability of fossil fuel Impacts on the polar bear.
On that I think Lomborg is quite wrong, well out of his league, and I would rather be safe than sorry on this.
My view of Lomborg is that he has gotten too much comfort out of being a skeptical gadfly for Global Warming and polar bears. I can literally see the Testosterone flying in any room he spouts his views in.
I have been down many roads with the Lomborg’s of the world and if they are wrong the consequances are huge. So there is a skepticisim following these types, that has irretrievable consequances. Gore’s view is overeaction, and for that matter so is mine, if we prove to be wrong on Global Warming.
Lomborg has some points but they are hard to see when literally his strongest allies are backed against a wall of his making.
He is to busy trying to sell a point of view and his latest book. We do not have to sell it for him. I think the judge for the BBC is skeptical enough, and I think his disagreements with Inconvieniant Truth are where much of the public is on Global Warming.
I am tired of debating this. People like Gore have done it for over 20 years… how do they put up with the Lomborg’s of the world while earth is whittling away and all of the reasons I can give to land softer in spite of Global Warming and who is right on the polar bear debate?