Lomborg vs Climate Cult

From The Australian

I have personally been on the receiving end of this climate alarmism enforcement for years. Last week, I was scheduled to give a public lecture at Duke University in the US when a group of climate-politicised professors – some who write for the UN Climate Panel – publicly asked Duke to cancel my appearance.

The political forces looking to spend the climate trillions and the academia segment supplying the fear want to scrub the climate debate of anything but the scariest scenarios. They want an unwavering allegiance to vigorous spending on climate policy, no matter its effectiveness.

They insist on treating this issue as a moral binary choice instead of a realistic balancing of costs and effectiveness which would allow for our many other challenges to be heard as well.

Certainly, the professors at Duke didn’t want anyone to hear dissenting facts.

Read the rest.

Here it is on Fox hopefully not paywalled.

Here’s the lecture they wanted canceled.

18 Replies to “Lomborg vs Climate Cult”

  1. You don’t spit on where your wages, government grants and subsidies come from.
    You promote others to believe your bullshit to keep the funds flowing.
    Economics 101.

    1. You’ve just described academic research. Bring in the money, no matter what. Come up with enough of the right malarkey to keep the cash coming. It doesn’t matter what one investigates so long as someone else pays for it.

      Never, never, never use one’s own money because the system won’t get its cut.

  2. “Hayek Lecture”? How soon until they cancel that in favor of the “Maoist Lecture”?

  3. Blacklock reports that a federal dept. states that few green projects can exist without subsidies.

      1. If you go to the “Blacklock’s Reporter” website the story is paywalled, but still provides a certain amount of information before the paywall.

  4. They never do want to hear the truth. That’s why they go out of the way to shut down so called “deniers”.
    If they had so much as an ounce of principle and integrity in defending their position, and in the interest in science, then they would have no problem allowing dissenting positions. But they don’t. The politics and religious aspect of their climate nutterism is what is important.
    How is it these climate alarmists always end up in a position of power?

    1. Just was contemplating on Canada having a new Super Hero…
      “Major Disaster” the Hypocrite.
      ‘Oh look’ as he runs away…
      ‘Look over there and there and there’ as he runs away…
      Certainly would be our politicians and media ‘Hero’.

  5. Lomborg has got the perspective right on the utility of climate actions but still subscribes to the IPCC and the CAGW premise and has faith in the public sector to subsidize innovation for positive outcomes. Whether his trust is real or going along to get along, he should have second thoughts after being cancelled by those institutions.

  6. Same bunch now running the pandemic too. Scary as you know what. Same lies, same censorship.

  7. WHO cares about Lomborg et al. We have a bunch of SCOC “judges” deciding that “the science is settled” and rules accordingly. Provinces and their Legislator’s have been rendered moot on any subject.

  8. We should be using the lexicon of the Left against them … Belief in CAGW is a “conspiracy theory”. … “Only CNN-Anon freaks believe global warming is killing the planet” …

  9. Other than his conviction that there is no doubt that humans are causing global warming, he talks a lot of sense. Maybe we are, but there is not a lot of scientific evidence to prove that. Otherwise, well worth the time to hear him out.