FAQ

The two books' message is identical, but the UK version is an extended version, with more numbers, texts and 59 graphs.

It is true that Fog has been very productive in his claims (http://www.lomborg-errors.dk/), and has been so since the publication of Lomborg's book in 1998 in Danish. However, Lomborg has answered Fog many times in publications, most clearly when Fog edited a book with arguments against Lomborg in 1999. Lomborg published a web-book of 180 pages painstakingly going through each argument in Fog's book, pointing out its unproductive errors and misunderstandings, Lomborg likewise replied to each and every of the first batch of claims from Fog to the DCSD, pointing out how they were incorrect and/or misleading. However, with limited time, Lomborg cannot reply to every new claim from Fog. Moreover, it would seem reasonable that Fog would have used his best counterarguments first, and clearly these have not stood up. 

Download the Web book: Godhedens pris from 1999.

Does Lomborg have a rebuttal of Fog's arguments in English?
Download Lomborg's short version in English of the Danish reply.

No. Using a critique written by Lomborg's critics in the Scientific American (January 2002), the Danish Committee on Scientific Dishonesty (DCSD) found that The Skeptical Environmentalist was objectively scientifically dishonest on January 7 2003. However, on December 17 2003, the Danish Ministry of Science, Technology and Innovation completely rescinded this finding.  It released a 70-page evaluation criticizing at least 13 points in the DCSD report, three of which individually would have led to it being rescinded. It found the DCSD verdict "dissatisfactory", "deserving [of] criticism" and "emotional." Most importantly, the Ministry found "that the DCSD has not documented where [Lomborg] has allegedly been biased in his choice of data and in his argumentation, and that the [DCSD] ruling is completely void of argumentation." The case was finally dropped by DCSD March 12 2004. While Lomborg's critics continue to quote the DCSD's 2003 verdict, it has been rescinded and found to be "dissatisfactory," "emotional" and "completely void of argumentation." An independent Dutch group of scientists analyzed the DCSD verdict and found that the comittee "delivered an almost totally political verdict."    

No. In Cool It he writes: "global warming is real and man-made. It will have a serious impact on humans and the environment toward the end of this century" (p8).   

No. In both his first Danish book in 1998 and the English version of The Skeptical Environmentalist in 2001, Bjorn Lomborg stressed that man-made global warming exists.  The introduction to the section on climate change in The Skeptical Environmentalist clearly states, "This chapter accepts the reality of man-made global warming" (p259).   

Yes. As Bjorn Lomborg argues in 'Cool It', we should focus on the smartest solutions to the problems that the world faces, whether we're dealing with climate change, communicable diseases, malnutrition, agricultural subsidies, or anything else. Lomborg finds that the smartest way to tackle global warming is to invest heavily in R&D in non-carbon emitting technologies, which will enable everyone to switch over to cheaper-than-fossil-fuel technologies sooner and thus dramatically reduce the 21st century emissions. Specifically, he suggests a ten-fold increase in R&D in non-CO2 -emitting energy technologies like solar, wind, carbon capture, fusion, fission, energy conservation etc.... This is entirely in line with the top recommendation from the Copenhagen Consensus 2008, which includes some of the word's top economists and five Nobel Laureates. Lomborg also supports a CO 2 tax comparable with the central or high estimates of CO2 damages. That means an estimate in the range of $2-14 per ton of CO 2, but not the unjustifiably high taxes of $20-40 implicit in Kyoto or the even higher ones ($85) suggested by the Stern report or Gore ($140). 

There were 12 overwhelmingly negative claims in Joe Stiglitz's review of Bjorn Lomborg's book False Alarm in the New York Times. But all 12 are overwhelmingly false. Read Lomborg's full response here, where he goes through the false claims one by one here.

You find Bjorn Lomborg's full response Activism dressed up as science here.

Dr. Lomborg has written a point-by-point statement on claims by Michael Mann and Tom Toles in the Washington Post. You can read his response here.

Bjorn Lomborg has written a detailed response debunking Howard Friel’s claims in ‘The Lomborg Deception.”  You can read the 27 pages response here.