dickie: Lomborg "advised in his book, "The Skeptical Environmentalist," published in 1998, that he finds no indication of widespread deforestation, and notes that even the Amazon forest still retains more than 80% of its cover in 1978".

Perhaps a reminder then of one of your "TWO" references? Help a poor illiterate old whatever monkey, for if even one of us can see there is no reference, what does that make the person who is unable to provide one and uses all manner of distraction to hide the fact? I will conclude that this is the case if your next post doesn't contain the reference, but only insult and bluster, and won't waste any more time with you. What I expect, however, is a "ciao" as you swing away from another unacknowledged mistake, and unsubstantiated smear.

"Corrupted statutory instruments"

“Perhaps a reminder then of one of your "TWO" references? Help a poor illiterate old whatever monkey, for if even one of us can see there is no reference, what does that make the person who is unable to provide one and uses all manner of distraction to hide the fact? I will conclude that this is the case if your next post doesn't contain the reference, but only insult and bluster, and won't waste any more time with you. What I expect, however, is a "ciao" as you swing away from another unacknowledged mistake, and unsubstantiated smear.” (Fungochumley)

Dear “poor illiterate old whatever monkey,”

Tediously, the following links have been carried forward from 18 November, 11.02AM, for your benefit. Perhaps you can ask your remedial teacher to translate the contents of these links, (remember....not one link but two - duh!) before "you swing away from another unacknowledged mistake, and unsubstantiated smear?”

Can I now look forward to your apology or just more of the same - incoherent, unintelligible, screeching?!

Ciao!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Skeptical_Environmentalist

http://209.85.173.132/search?q=cache:X40c_eSy3XUJ:www.absoluteastronomy.com/topics/The_Skeptical_Environmentalist+Amazon+forest+still+retains+more+than+80%25+of+its+cover+in+1978+bjorn+lomborg&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=3&gl=au&lr=lang_en
(Posted by dickie, Tuesday, 18 November 2008 11:02:25 AM)

dickie,

In a post (Friday, 14 November 2008 11:16:33 AM) you gave us the following:
"Lomborg who has an MA in political science, optimistically advised in his book, "The Skeptical Environmentalist," published in 1998, that he finds no indication of widespread deforestation, and notes that even the Amazon forest still retains more than 80% of its cover in 1978 and that 'basically, our forests are not under threat and that most of the really serious problems have been dealt with.'

You provided no reference for this, and were subsequently asked for one. (IanC, Saturday, 15 November 2008 8:19:12 AM and again at 11:14:26 AM) You were also given a page reference from the PRIMARY SOURCE in question contradicting this statement.(On the Gunn's thread on 14th Nov, and again here on Sunday, 16 November 2008 8:01:12 PM)

No reference or retraction was forthcoming amidst all your bluster, and you now have the nerve to mention two links randomly dropped in in the middle of a comment on Lomborg's association with Greenpeace TWO DAYS later (on Tuesday, 18 November 2008 11:02:25 AM) as your references, and accuse others of being incoherent and illiterate for not following your wandering nonsense. Moreover, apart from being unimpressed by the sum total of your "research" into Lomborg, in one of the great ironies of recent OLO history, the links provided are to:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Skeptical_Environmentalist

http://209.85.173.132/search?q=cache:X40c_eSy3XUJ:www.absoluteastronomy.com/topics/The_Skeptical_Environmentalist+Amazon+forest+still+retains+more+than+80%25+of+its+cover+in+1978+bjorn+lomborg&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=3&gl=au&lr=lang_en

in the same comment, in which you state:

"Of course, most of the hyperactive Lomborg's quotes allude to secondary literature and media articles..."

It is tedious, dickie, and I have had enough of it. I will let anyone who is interested be the judge.

Dickie

I’ve been busy elsewhere. No ‘climate scientist’ disputes the fact that the planet is warming or that humanity is contributing to it – ‘denialists’ dispute this. IanC gives the impression he is not associated with the Lavoisier Group (he says he has not given presentations to them). This may be so, but this group (like others of neo-con leanings) champion his dogma. Ian is not a ‘denialist’ (sorry if I gave that impression, Clive Hamilton obviously touched a raw nerve with him) but he is caught between a rock and a hard place.

http://www.lavoisier.com.au/articles/climate-change-by-author.php#anchor3

It reads like a who’s who of the ‘deny and delay’ brigade, as you well know.

Ian Castles is listed immediately below His Holiness Pope Benedict XVI in the Lavoisier Group’s letter to Ban Ki Moon presented at Bali last year (also presented to Garnaut).

http://www.lavoisier.com.au/articles/climate-policy/garnaut/GarnautsubappxA.pdf

The Office of the Secretary General makes no claim to have entertained a response to His Holiness Pope Benedict XVI, let alone the Lavoisier Group. If IanC knows of a response, I would be interested to know what was said (it’s not on LG’s web site).

Here's a letter by other senior economists, note the difference in tone.

www.wwf.org.au/publications/openletterafrv2.pdf

Do economic rationalists have it wrong? I think so – look no further than the financial turmoil that the world is now facing. It goes deeper though. Most of the contention about global warming seems to be centred on economics and political ideology, not the science. I agree (with Lindzen) that science has become politicised – but not for the reasons he outlines, quite the opposite in fact.

The health of the planet is being compromised by ‘free market’ policies and the rambunctious desire for economic growth at all costs – a dilemma for politicians and economists of all persuasions.

You may be interested in this (the lap dog wouldn’t)

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/11/081117193013.htm

and

http://www.sustainabilityscience.org/category.html?categoryid=67

Now, I don’t care whether it is Mr or Mrs Fungochumley or if that is her/his real name. What is important is what she/he says ... unfortunately, it is a waste of time replying to her/him.

Thanks Q&A for posting a link to the ‘dogma’ (your word) emanating from the Lavoisier Group. If association with this Group is demonstrated by inclusion in this list alongside Don Aitkin, David Henderson, Garth Paltridge and John Zillman, I’m happy to be counted in.

As you’ve been trawling around for information on the Lavoisier Group, you may want to know that the first Annual Report of the Co-operative Centre on Greenhouse Accounting, the Centre’s first official media release in 2000 reported the acceptance by Professor Graham Farquhar FAA FRS of the Lavoisier Group’s invitation to present at a conference in Melbourne. Professor Farquhar was at this time a coordinating lead author for the IPCC. The CRC said that its media release ‘prompted several inquiries for information about the Centre and a request from the Sydney Powerhouse Museum for contributions to their greenhouse exhibition from 2001 to 2005.’

Other speakers at the Lavoisier meeting included Alan Oxley, former Australian Ambassador to the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade and former Chairman of the GATT Council; Dr Wendy Craik, Executive Director of the National Farmers’ Federation, who before her appointment to the NFF had spent 17 years working for the Great Barrier Reef Marine Park Authority; Donald McGauchie, former President of the Grains Council of Australia and of the NFF; the Hon Tony Staley, Federal President of the Liberal Party; and Bob Hogg AO, former National Secretary of the ALP and former Senior Adviser to Prime Minister Bob Hawke. Lavoisier’s President is of course Peter Walsh, who was for seven years successively Minister for Resources and Energy and Minister of Finance in the Hawke Government.

Dickie, You said that I’d ‘quite expeditiously’ had my name removed from the Lavoisier Group website. Do you have any evidence for your claim, or did you just make that up as well