Some funny factoids here. Just who previously logged the forests that have been undisturbed for 1000 years? Regrowth has a different biology eg it is free of thylacines. Snow buildup has caused a few glaciers to increase; one day that snow will turn to rain. Small numbers make a big difference to sensitive systems; try putting 0.7% salt in your next cup of tea.

Alan Moran is the Director of the Deregulation Unit at the Institute of Public Affairs - says it all really, doesn't it?

Alan Moran says "In fact the area of the globe over which mankind might be said to exercise some dominance - the top one kilometer of the surface - comprises only 0.7 per cent of the planet." I suppose this is designed to be confusing. What does the top one kilometer of the surface mean.

The figures I am familiar with are a little different. There are about 97 million square kilometres of inhabitable land on the earth. That does not include Death Valley and Antarctica or the oceans and lakes. Mankind farms about 17 (mil sq km), uses 10 for grazing, uses about 7 of the forests (although only 2 for intense harvesting) and 0.5 for cities, towns and villages. That adds up to about 34.5 million square kilometres or about 36%. Compared to 0.7% he is off by a factor of about 50.

I sure hope he was not off by a factor of 50 on his global warming calculations.

This is especially amusing two sentences after he says ". . . the scientific establishment is all too reticent to offer correct facts." Maybe he thinks that since he is an economist he gets a free kick. It is also ironic that he criticises NGOs for exaggerating and distorting. They could learn a thing or two from him about exaggeration and distortion.

Don't worry Alan - it would take no one less than Fidel Castro to convince these people otherwise.

Possibly the most laughable of all Moran's writings. Not really worth a response.

Instead, re his reference to Michael Crichton's latest novel, 'State of Fear,' the article by Chris Mooney (writing in CSICOP* Online) 'Bad Science, Bad Fiction' makes worthwhile reading. See http://www.csicop.org/doubtandabout/crichton/

It also explains why Moran chooses to allude to this particular novel when seeking to cast environmentalism and environmentalists in his particularly murky light. For the record, I am a fan of Chrichton's work, and wouldn't dream of curtailing the author's right to get it wrong (on climate change science in this instance) or to misrepresent environmentalism.

*CSICOP - the Committee for Scientific Investigation of Claims of the Paranormal - is a US organisation whose focus is on promoting critical thinking in the public interest.

Interesting viewpoint Alan - shame it hasn't one reference, bar a fictional novel, to back up the opinions expressed.

Regards

Jo