The most valuable view is the dissenting view, that disagrees with you, or mob rule/conventional wisdom.

If a man and his boss agree on almost everything? One of them is clearly redundant!

Throughout the course of human history all progress has been accompanied by spirited debate!

Debate that saw the end of slavery, child labour, and other unconscionable practises!

When it comes to climate change, cause and effect, Bjorn Lomborg is the only one making sense!?

If your view is based on logic's rites, you have nothing to fear from dissent, but plenty if the opponent makes vastly more sense than you do!?

Look, poor folks live hand to mouth, with the first casualty being our/their forests, as they clearfell/burn land to grow food or use wood as their primary fuel.

Thus they add to the Co2 levels and reduce the natural means to sequester it?

They should change to wind or solar power!

Would that any could actually afford to do so!

A far better solution and one that produces the world's cheapest alternative energy is using digestors to turn human biological waste into a fuel, that can be used in ceramic fuel cells; that then produce reliable 24/7, on demand energy and endless free hot water!

[Let's not forget the consequence of raw sewage on the health prospects of millions!]

The aforementioned, the very best place for our finest hour, aid dollars!

So instead of the world's most impoverished folks being the central part of the problem; they become a major part of the solution!

These university (we must silence Bjorn Lomborg) cretins are no better than someone with fingers in ears going, la,la,la,la,la!

Had humankind followed that odious example? We would still be living in caves hunting our food with a stone tied to a stick!
Rhrosty.

Hi Peter,

Surely a university is supposed to be a forum for 'dangerous ideas' ? In this case, if I were a faculty member in environmental science, with hundreds of students to assign essays and projects to, this would be a golden opportunity to mobilise students to pick apart any and all of the ideas that such a Centre would put up ? Examining real-world problems (such as the very existence of such a Centre represents to faculty staff, it seems) would be surely more exciting and productive than getting students to just draw out stuff from books and articles to pad out their 1500 words and get a B+ ?

Karl Popper would be overjoyed at such an initiative: he would ask, do the propositions of such a Centre stand up to scrutiny ? How can we learn from their 'mistakes' ? If they come up with other ideas in response, how can we pull them apart and find their shortcomings ? How can we advance human understanding in a co-operative way ?

It's a bit ironic that the same people who would complain that universities are nothing more than bourgeois sausage-factories, are afraid of any mechanism for critiquing environmental and social policies, and of anything provocative enough to make students think through issues: are their better ways ? have we got it all a bit arse-up ? what's really at stake here ? why do so many questions, and proposals about climate have to be demonised ?

Thanks, Peter.

Joe

How China must laugh at the total irrational dogmas that line the pockets of Green activist. Like the evolution fantasy anyone with half a brain knows its a fallacy but self interest in holding on the tax payer funded jobs wins out. The 'Rationalist' have certainly brainwashed the masses. Like Flannery, the charlotans need the media and a few UN 'experts' to prevent any proper analysis and to demonise those pointing out their totally flawed prophecies/dogmas. Those who have been around a while just shake their head and say here we go again.

btw - any water left in Sydney dams?, any snow left in Europe? has the oil run out (isn't it $1000 barrel), one fool from Greenpeace or likeminded organisation tried to tell me that kangaroos were close to extinction. The more immorral our community becomes the more 'moral' environment causes our councils, Goverments and individuals take on.
Imagine how clean our water ways, oceans and land could be if we put a fraction of the money into doing something useful rather than pushing the deceptive faith of the socialist.

These days, the dictators, the totalitarians, are academics totally lacking in real life experience, couldn't fight their way out of a wet paper bag or get a productive job; they would wet themselves if confronted - and we meekly allow them to ruin our lives.

Sheesh!

Hi Runner,

About all those dams running dry, as Professor Flannery predicted, is it still raining in southern New South wales ? Is that dam still about to burst up from Kiama ? Are the dams filling up around Sydney ? Or are they already full ?

Back in March or April, the BoM here in Adelaide predicted a warm, dry winter and spring. I suppose we're lucky here that winter wasn't colder and wetter, otherwise we would have been in trouble. Now they're predicting a wetter-than-usual spring. Time to get out the sun-screen. Slip slop slap.

Joe

Greens will never forgive Lomborg for his book “The Skeptical Environmentalist”, which systematically debunks many of the more alarmist claims about humanity’s effects on the environment.

The idea that evidence-based policy making should be opposed in principle is rather alarming. I think Lomborg is wrong on some things, but he has interesting things to say and deserves a hearing.

It is shameful that UWA backed down on this issue – especially as it apparently had no qualms about hosting the shameless propagandist Stephan Lewandowsky.