More Extreme Earth
It just never ends. Having been visited by a couple of “contrarians” (aka “deniers”) following my post “Extreme Earth” I’ve added a list of links relating to the math. Having seen this denounced by an advocate for the mining industry (itself a major pollutor) I’ve added some links below from the Union of Concerned Scientists (UCS), whose site I urge anyone interested in these matters to visit. Of particular interest is the UCS’ articles on the “global warming contrarian” movement. I will include one example of why people who denounce global warming should not have their claims accepted at face value.
UCS Examines ‘The Skeptical Environmentalist’Background
A book by Bjørn Lomborg, a political scientist and professor of statistics at the University of Aarhus in Denmark, has created quite a stir since its 2001 release. Lomborg accuses scientists and environmental organizations of making false and exaggerated claims about the world’s environmental problems. He concludes that population growth is not a problem, that there is plenty of freshwater around, that deforestation rates and species extinctions are grossly exaggerated, that the pollution battle has been won, and that global warming is too expensive to fix. A self-proclaimed environmentalist and skeptic, he claims that his reanalysis of environmental data measures “the real state of the world.”
The heavily promoted book, published by Cambridge University Press, has received significant attention from the media and praise from commentators writing in The Economist, The New York Times, and Washington Post. For example, the Post’s reviewer (a philosophy professor from New Zealand) concluded that it was “a magnificent achievement,” and “the most significant work on the environment since the appearance of its polar opposite, Rachel Carson’s Silent Spring, in 1962.” Meanwhile, groups with a vested interest in maintaining the status quo are using the book to promote their “no need to take action to address global environmental problems” agenda. For example, the “Cooler Heads Coalition” — formed by the Competitive Enterprise Institute and others to “dispel the myths of global warming” — featured Lomborg in a Capitol Hill briefing on global warming.
Does this book merit such positive attention? Does Lomborg provide new insights? Are his claims supported by the data? A healthy skepticism towards the claims of others is, after all, one of the hallmarks of good science. And, at first glance, Lomborg’s book appears to be an objective and rigorous scientific analysis. It is published by a leading academic press, and contains an extensive bibliography and nearly 3,000 footnotes.
To answer these questions, UCS invited several of the world’s leading experts on water resources, biodiversity, and climate change to carefully review the sections in Lomborg’s book that address their areas of expertise. We asked them to evaluate whether Lomborg’s skepticism is coupled with the other hallmarks of good science – namely, objectivity, understanding of the underlying concepts, appropriate statistical methods and careful peer review. Reviewing Lomborg’s claims are Dr. Peter Gleick, an internationally recognized expert on the state of freshwater resources; Dr. Jerry Mahlman, one of the most highly regarded atmospheric scientists and climate modelers; and top biologists and biodiversity experts Dr.’s Edward O. Wilson, Thomas Lovejoy, Norman Myers, Jeffrey Harvey and Stuart Pimm.
These separately written expert reviews unequivocally demonstrate that on closer inspection, Lomborg’s book is seriously flawed and fails to meet basic standards of credible scientific analysis. The authors note how Lomborg consistently misuses, misrepresents or misinterprets data to greatly underestimate rates of species extinction, ignore evidence that billions of people lack access to clean water and sanitation, and minimize the extent and impacts of global warming due to the burning of fossil fuels and other human-caused emissions of heat-trapping gases. Time and again, these experts find that Lomborg’s assertions and analyses are marred by flawed logic, inappropriate use of statistics and hidden value judgments. He uncritically and selectively cites literature — often not peer-reviewed — that supports his assertions, while ignoring or misinterpreting scientific evidence that does not. His consistently flawed use of scientific data is, in Peter Gleick’s words “unexpected and disturbing in a statistician”.
These reviews show that The Skeptical Environmentalist fits squarely in a tradition of contrarian works on the environment that may gain temporary prominence but ultimately fail to stand up to scientific scrutiny. Others, such as Julian Simon and Gregg Easterbrook, have come before him, and others no doubt will follow. Correcting the misperceptions these works foster is an essential task, for, as noted above, groups with anti-environmental agendas use these works to promote their objectives. It is also an unfortunate, time-consuming distraction, for it pulls talented scientists away from the pressing research needed to help us understand the environmental challenges we face and their prospective solutions.
Winston Churchill once said, “A lie gets halfway around the world before the truth has a chance to get its pants on”, reminding usof the parable of the Tortoise and the Hare. Like the Hare, Lomborg’s lie has raced out in front of the truth. With the help of these careful scientific peer reviews, UCS hopes that the truth, like the Tortoise, will catch up and emerge the ultimate victor.
Editor’s note: In addition to these UCS-solicited reviews, critiques of Lomborg’s book have also been published in Scientific American, Nature, Science, and other scientific journals, as well as on several web sites (see Related Links).
Follow the link below to review other information on the “contrarian” movement.
Global Warming Contrarians
The following link will lead you to articles on the science of global warming.
Hrafnkell Haraldsson is the author of A Heathen’s Day, which since 2005 has addressed the life and thoughts of a modern day Heathen. He maintains a second blog, Digital Gods (www.digital-gods.com) which focuses on polytheism for the digital age. He is also the founder of the Mos Maiorum Foundation (www.mosmaiorum.org) which is dedicated to the study and support of Paganism as ethnic religion. 
Thank you for this. For readers interested in the actual numbers, here is a link to my original analytical critique of Lomborg:
http://www.pacinst.org/publications/essays_and_opinion/lomborg_review_by_gleick_for_UCS.pdf
But less well know (though peer reviewed) is my specific critique on water published in Environment magazine in 2002. I don't know if this is online, but here is the full reference:
Gleick, P.H. 2002. “Is the Skeptic All Wet?” Environment, Vol. 44, No. 6, pp. 36-40.
Dr. Gleick, thank you for commenting, and thank you for posting a link to your article, "Where's Waldo?" I look forward to reading it over lunch.
It never ceases to amaze me the attention people like Lomborg get, while critiques of these naysayers are never publicized. It is apparently a great deal more enjoyable for the media to sensationalize than to look at cold, hard facts.
Groups like UCS do a great service to us all by making known to a wider audience the evidence that is so often drowned out by the blare of trumpets.
I quick Google shows that your article "Is the Skeptic All Wet?" is apparently available for those willing to subscribe or pay to read it. I don't know if students might have free access via subscriptions their universities hold as I haven't had a chance to check that out yet myself.
Congratulations, in once again getting a reputed author, about whom you have posted, to come over and comment on your blog!
Boy, am I glad to be a fan of "A Heathen's Day" or what?
Something peculiar in regards to the mining industry has been happening in the states of Jharkhand and West Bengal, in eastern India. Extensive mining has deprived the region of its green cover and this has made the elephants to raid the paddy fields and steal the fruits, vegetables and grains the farmers living there, grow for their livelihood. Mining is responsible for creating a schism between man and animal in eastern India.
Mining has also reduced the number of mangrove trees. Mangrove trees are essential in flood control. They soak up large amounts of water and prevent flooding. Now, with very few trees left, there is a possibility of flooding every time the water level in the Ganga (known to the west as the "Ganges") river rises, resulting from heavy rains.
I'll never cease to be amazed by how short-sighted people can be. It's one thing, 2000 years ago to cut down all the trees on a hill, then let sheep graze there and turn the hill into desert. It's quite another to allow such things to happen today when we fully understand what is happening, and why.
But even when people do understand, they have to care, and many don't. Even my father had that approach; what mattered to him was now. He told me once he didn't care about whatever type of world people had to deal with when he was gone. And the people making the profits, of course, never have to experience the consequences first-hand.