A
funny thing is happening to Bjorn Lomborg, author of The Skeptical
Environmentalist. Funny, yet sad, too. Lomborg's book is basically
an expose of the statistical fallacies underlying several of the most
global of environmental scares--global warming, overpopulation, air
and water pollution, etc. Lomborg makes a convincing case that these
scares are hugely overblown, and a good case that they are manageable.
Not surprisingly, the scaremongers are fighting back.
That is the funny part, because it only serves to sell more Lomborg
books. As the saying goes, they are spelling his name right. The sad
part is to see who is promoting the scaremongers, and how. It is
Scientific American, an American institution now apparently gone
nuts.
It started with Grist, a green webzine that
could be expected to lambaste Lomborg. They did it with a panel of four
well-known scaremongers, led by Stephen Schneider, arguably the father
of the climate change scare (and once a scaremonger for global cooling).
Schneider is famous for actually stating the scaremonger's creed
publicly, in an interview for Discover magazine in October 1989:
"To capture the public imagination, we have to offer up some scary
scenarios, make simplified dramatic statements and little mention of any
doubts one might have. Each of us has to decide the right balance
between being effective, and being honest."
Of course Grist did not offer Lomborg a chance
to rebut these critics. Journalistic integrity is not their strong suit.
But hopefully some of Grist's green readers were enticed to buy
and read the book. More money for Bjorn.
Now comes the January issue of Scientific American.
It features a colorful 11-page spread, artfully decorated with wind
turbines and iceless polar bears, containing a critique of The
Skeptical Environmentalist. Sadly, the critics are another panel of
four well-known scaremongers, led by the same Stephen Schneider.
Apparently Schneider is making a comeback on Bjorn's back, as it were.
Significantly, two of the other "leading experts"
chosen by SciAm to rebut Lomborg cite Paul Ehrlich, the
thoroughly discredited author of the first blockbuster scaremonger book
-- The Population Bomb--with reverence. The alleged energy
expert, John Holdren, co-authored a 1977 college textbook, Ecoscience--with
Ehrlich. Not a lot of balance here.
Sadder still, SciAm did not offer Bjorn
rebuttal space, not even in a later issue. He says he will respond on
his web page--www.Lomborg.org. Who's right is not the issue. It is a
fundamental principle of journalism that you don't moon a guy without
giving him a chance to drop his pants too. Shame on Scientific
American.
Even worse, SciAm's editor-in-chief, John
Rennie, also piles on, with what has to be one of the stupidest
headlines I have ever seen (I have seen a lot). Rennie's masterpiece of
absurdity is "Misleading math about the earth--Science defends itself
against The Skeptical Environmentalist."
Never mind the "misleading math" part, that is the
standard argument against Lomborg, that he is not telling the whole
story, whatever that is. Look at the second part. Think about it,
because it says that All of Science is arrayed against Lomborg. Far out!
Indeed, it is far out. To be sure Lomborg is
controversial. To be sure, his statistics are selective, because he is
making a specific point. All of the relevant statistics would not fit in
my house, on microfilm, probably not on hard drives. But "all of
science?" Bjorn missed all of science? The absurdity speaks for itself,
but this is precisely how the scaremongers see themselves. All of
science? Not even close. Shame on Scientific American.
But now comes the funny part again. Despite SciAm's
incredible arrogance and bias, it is an American institution. It is sold
in supermarkets and drug stores across the land. And they spelled
Bjorn's name right. So I can imagine millions of four-eyed high school
science nerds, like I once was, now wanting to read The Skeptical
Environmentalist. Thank you, Scientific American, thank you
very much.
