Letters to the Editor
-
Excessively simple minded analysis
As S.S. pointed out here, the "problems" of the world don't operate in an either-or fashion, they tend to be synergistic. Fight climate change or fight malaria? In fact, climate change will extend the range of malarial mosquitoes to new territories where it used to be too cold for them. This does not take a brilliant Ph.D. climatologist to figure out. (West Nile fever is now infecting people in Alberta, Canada). Rising sea levels, floods, droughts, etc. will cause famines, and mass migrations of people in the third world leading to more wars, massacres, genocides, etc. Again, this is not something that the IPCC needs to prove via a page full of references to scientific publications.
For an example, imagine if Lomborg had lived a couple of centuries ago, to argue that this newfangled radical emphasis on sanitation and public hygiene and keeping the feces out of the drinking water was nice, but it was diverting badly needed funds which could be better used on more immediately productive research into medical treatments, like bloodletting.
The second obvious gross error made by Lomborg and the rest of the "we-can-spend-the-money-better-elsewhere" folks is to equate "costs" in a profoundly bizarre way; $1 billion spent on perfecting technology which makes us more energy-efficient or leads to practical application of solar power, for instance, is NOT the same as $1 billion spent on rebuilding large US port cities which are destroyed as a result of a storm and/or sea level rise.