Climatic clear thinker Bjorn Lomborg strikes again with a new film, “COOL IT”, based on his book of the same name. Blog post: coolit-themovie.com
Lomborg’s points, which suggest we need to address problems like global warming and global poverty more rationally, are so obvious as to defy intelligent objection, yet he remains one of the most controversial activists on earth, especially after offending the sensibilities of many with his remarkable book “The Skeptical Environmentalist”.
Lomborg’s views are slowly gaining the respect they deserve as alarmism about environmental issues falls prey to the facts and to common sense observations. Clearly there’s global warming, and clearly it’s not likely to be catastrophic. Dealing with massive current problems like global poverty, health, and economic issues will have a much greater return on our time and money investments than expensive and politicized mitigation programs, many of which will at best delay the effects of carbon emissions for only a few years at a staggering cost.
COOL IT serves as a counterpoint to the alarmism and denial that have characterized the climate debate for too long.
Joe Duck 
L’s points, which suggest we need to address problems like global warming and global poverty more rationally, are so obvious as to defy intelligent objection, yet he remains one of the most controversial activists on earth, especially after offending the sensibilities of many with his remarkable book “The Skeptical Environmentalist”.
L.’s writing presents another “media-simulacra issue” in current parlance. L.’s mere presence and manner of communication probably offends many. Yet…intelligent humans see beyond the mere character issues and address the points, ie data/evidence issues (though admittedly L’s not an atmospheric physicist, though more than a few high-powered scientists share his views–Freeman Dyson for one).
Simulacra however remains an issue–the AGW True Believers most likely think L. works for Foxnews or the teabaggers or something, and it’s unlikely anything (even the sketchy CO2-to- warming studies) will change their dogmatic approach to the issue. The rightist “denialists,” ie Foxnews-bots are hardly different in terms of their hasty dismissal of the data suggesting warming. The hype generally displaces careful weighing of facts and evidence; e.g. the Herd does not care for uncertainty.
Lomborg’s views are slowly gaining the respect they deserve as alarmism about environmental issues falls prey to the facts and to common sense observations.
That’s debatable. He’s not well-known. For that matter, others have taken a skeptical (not the same as “denialist”) view of AGW– Crichton’s State of Fear from a few years ago had suggested as much (with much data and supporting evidence). Or the Counterpunch gang (also not so well known). Or McIntyre, who you linked to a few times: he’s not cute or PC, but McIntyre’s research has caused Mann to clarify/modify some points, apparently.
One might say an ideology of AGW has formed, with two opposing groups. Many of them are not qualified to speak on the specifically scientific or statistical issues (then, neither was Al Gore). It’s not that “common sensical” either–the research on the CO2, atmosphere, and “forcing”,etc. involves some advanced analytical chemistry, rather beyond the usual “Intro to the Periodic table” that a few dweebs vaguely recall.
Ergo, the Herd cannot be expected to address AGW with much or any awareness of the issue–nor can the politicians, really. That hasn’t stopped the hysteria-cases of links und rechts.