• úvod
  • témata
  • události
  • tržiště
  • diskuze
  • nástěnka
    • přihlásit
    registrace
    ztracené heslo?
    TUHODezinformace o klimatu // Dont confuse me with the facts!
    Jedním ze zásadních důvodů, proč je klimatická změna tak obtížné téma je obrovské množství dezinformací, které ho obklopuje. Sociologové identifikovali široké dezinformační hnutí, které je z části organizované fosilním průmyslem. Množství empirických důkazů ukazuje, že fosilní průmysl ročně vynakládá obrovské množství prostředků za cílem oddálit nebo neutralizovat politiky směřující k regulaci spotřeby fosilních paliv. Jak se ale v takové debatě vyznat? Jaká je česká debata v kontextu světa? Ale hlavně jaké subjekty se do dezinformací zapojují, jaké techniky a jaké prostředky používají k neutralizaci veřejné diskuze.
    rozbalit záhlaví
    TADEAS
    TADEAS --- ---
    Climate change is ‘not the end of the world’ | Bjørn Lomborg
    https://youtu.be/lE-nxB73IUE?si=r8ezYgCaE2hRDEo3
    TUHO
    TUHO --- ---
    Some Realism About Environmental Skepticism: The Implications of Bjørn Lomborg's The Skeptical Environmentalist for Environmental Law and Policy
    Douglas A. Kysar
    Ecology Law Quarterly

    https://www.jstor.org/stable/24114215
    TUHO
    TUHO --- ---
    BJORN LOMBORG CLIMATE DEATHS GRAPH DEBUNKED
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GKL8Ajefj7Y
    TUHO
    TUHO --- ---
    +2
    TUHO: Tady dobra rekapitulace Lomborgova vyvoje

    One of the chapters that I revised was on deforestation. Lomborg had consulted a new, authoritative report on the state of the world´s forests, published by FAO in the spring of 2001. This FAO report stated with much greater certainty than before that the global forest area was declining. Although Lomborg had read this, he did not change his original text, and still claimed that the global forest area is not declining, so that he could still present WWF as an unreliable institution. More than anything else, this proved to me that Lomborg was guilty of deliberate and malicious manipulation.

    index
    http://www.lomborg-errors.dk/lomborgstory.htm
    TUHO
    TUHO --- ---
    1 odpověď+2
    trosku backgroundu k Bjorn Lomborgovi

    In 1998, when Lomborg first appeared in the Danish media, it soon had to be realized that Lomborg´s errors could not be corrected by simple correspondence in the newspapers. Kåre Fog was one of the persons who took the initiative to form an organized opposition by producing a book that pointed out the flaws of Lomborg´s book. This was done under the auspices of the Danish Ecological Council. Kåre Fog became a member of the editorial board, and got contact to many other experts that had tried to oppose Lomborg.

    When Lomborg published the English version of his book in 2001, the Ecological Council decided to make an English version of their counter-book (see link below). Kåre Fog had the job to revise several chapters on biological issues for the English version, and during this work, he realized that Lomborg had learned very little from the raised criticism, and that many of his statements were at variance with the facts that Lomborg knew. Thus, it became apparent that Lomborg´s text was deliberately misleading.

    index
    http://www.lomborg-errors.dk/cv.htm
    TUHO
    TUHO --- ---
    starsi debunk lomborga

    Climate cost study authors accuse Bjørn Lomborg of misinterpreting results | Graham Readfearn | The Guardian
    https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/dec/02/climate-cost-study-authors-accuse-bjrn-lomborg-of-misinterpreting-results
    TUHO
    TUHO --- ---
    1 odpověď+8
    This Wall Street Journal article comments on the fact that atoll islands in the Pacific are not all simply shrinking as sea level rises, because dynamic coastal processes can move sediment to build shorelines outward. However, the article doesn’t mention that sea level rise related to unchecked global warming would ultimately make many low-lying islands in the Pacific uninhabitable.

    The author, Bjorn Lomborg, cherry-picks this specific piece of research and uses it in support of a broad argument against the value of climate policy. He also misrepresents the Paris Agreement to downplay its potential to curb future climate change.

    Analysis of “About Those Non-Disappearing Pacific Islands” – Climate Feedback
    https://climatefeedback.org/evaluation/sea-level-rise-those-non-disappearing-pacific-islands-bjorn-lomborg-wall-street-journal/

    plus neco z domacich lluhu a haaaju

    TADEAS
    TADEAS --- ---
    12 Ways the Planet Could Truly Be Saved | Bjørn Lomborg | EP 345
    https://youtu.be/Q9m_6TVJysI
    TADEAS
    TADEAS --- ---
    TADEAS:

    Climate Change Debate: Bjørn Lomborg and Andrew Revkin | Lex Fridman Podcast #339
    https://youtu.be/5Gk9gIpGvSE
    YMLADRIS
    YMLADRIS --- ---
    1 odpověď+1
    zase znovu me prekvapuje, proc to ten lomborg dela. on prece neni blby.

    TUHO
    TUHO --- ---
    #lomborg

    In this major assessment of leading climate-change skeptic Bjørn Lomborg, Howard Friel meticulously deconstructs the Danish statistician’s claim that global warming is “no catastrophe” by exposing the systematic misrepresentations and partial accounting that are at the core of climate skepticism. His detailed analysis serves not only as a guide to reading the global warming skeptics, but also as a model for assessing the state of climate science. With attention to the complexities of climate-related phenomena across a range of areas—from Arctic sea ice to the Antarctic ice sheet—The Lomborg Deception also offers readers an enlightening review of some of today’s most urgent climate concerns.

    Friel’s book is the first to respond directly to Lomborg’s controversial research as published in The Skeptical Environmentalist (2001) and Cool It: The Skeptical Environmentalist’s Guide to Global Warming (2007). His close reading of Lomborg’s textual claims and supporting footnotes reveals a lengthy list of findings that will rock climate skeptics and their allies in the government and news media, demonstrating that the published peer-reviewed climate science, as assessed mainly by the U.N.’s Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, has had it mostly right—even if somewhat conservatively right—all along. Friel’s able defense of Al Gore’s An Inconvenient Truth against Lomborg’s repeated attacks is by itself worth an attentive reading.

    The Lomborg Deception
    https://yalebooks.yale.edu/book/9780300171280/the-lomborg-deception/
    TUHO
    TUHO --- ---
    +1
    Neco k Lomborgovi



    RealClimate: Bjørn Lomborg, just a scientist with a different opinion?
    https://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2015/08/bjorn-lomborg-just-a-scientist-with-a-different-opinion/
    TADEAS
    TADEAS --- ---
    TUHO: jo tak on tam placa neco o tom jak abys neco predikoval na 100 let, musis zapojit klimatickej model, socioekonomickej model, a ty modely maj X nejakejch predpokladu a ze kdyz se ti nejaky zhroutej tak ty kodely neplatej a cely je to na vode, nejaka takovehle dojmologie s krestansko-filosofickou omackou. ale neber me za slovo, kde ma nejakej nejvetai rozbor tohohle nevim, ale I trust lomborg my jeho duveruhodnost posila hodne hluboko :D ... jo a na svoje book tours lita private jetem, pochopitelne :)
    TADEAS
    TADEAS --- ---
    2 odpovědi
    41m "I trust Lomborg", "I don't lnow what environment is"

    Jordan Peterson: Life, Death, Power, Fame, and Meaning | Lex Fridman Podcast #313
    https://youtu.be/sY8aFSY2zv4
    HYNEK
    HYNEK --- ---
    +2
    Nevite nekdo naky vysvetleni, kde se vzal Lomborg tady "exkluzivne" ve FINMAGU?
    Na koho tam jsou kde jaky vazby?
    Ma tam pravidelne clanek kazdy mesic.
    Celkove mu tam otiskli vic nez (!!!) 30 clanku.

    Když přijde Putin, zelená jde stranou. Vyspělý svět konečně přiznal barvu | Finmag.cz
    https://finmag.penize.cz/politika/436003-kdyz-prijde-putin-zelena-jde-stranou-vyspely-svet-konecne-priznal-barvu
    TUHO
    TUHO --- ---
    1 odpověď+1
    Protahovani exponencial po druhe... A k tomu Lomborg, ktery tvrdi, ze snizeni emisi nic nezmeni .))

    GOJATLA
    GOJATLA --- ---
    +1
    WARNING: Top 10 climate deniers: They are all bought and paid for by the Fossil fuel propaganda machine.
    Extinction Rebellion (FB)

    Senator James Inhofe
    Received more than 2,000,000 in fossil fuel funding

    Mark Morano
    Funded by Exxon and Chevron

    Chris Horner
    Funded by Alpha Natural resources (coal).
    Supported by Heartland (sponsored for years by Exxon and Koch Brothers)

    Myron Ebell
    Named “Most respected Global warming skeptics” by Business Insider
    Funded by Exxon , American coalition for a clean coal, Koch industries, Marathon Petroleum.

    Steve Milloy
    Director of Murray Energy, a coal company. Formerly associated with big Tobacco.

    Patrick Micheals
    40% of his paycheck is from fossil fuel industry. Works for Cato Institute, a climate denial think tank funded by the usual suspects.
    Coming to Europe

    Bjørn Lomborg
    Lomborg accepts the fact that human emissions of greenhouse gases cause climate change, he argues the net economic impacts will not turn negative for more than 50 years.
    Likes to outline the positives of fossil fuels and the cost of renewables and throws doubt on all solutions . That aside seems to like contracting himself.
    Funded by Paul Singer (Vulture capital) other funders include the Danish government and undeclared sources.

    Matt Ridley
    The Viscount benefits from coal mining on inherited family lands.
    Claims to be a science writer and journalist. Managed to sink Northern Rock bank then win a seat in the House of Lords. Where his wife Baroness Hogg also holds a life seat.

    Christopher Monckton
    Another Viscount this time armed with a classics degree expounds on Climate science.
    Meets and associates with denier think tanks like Heartland.

    Fred Singer
    (deceased) was on the payroll of Heartland which everyone by now should know is a well funded climate denial hotbed of misinformation.
    The sad part is they paid him $5000 a month to twist science and cast doubt.

    WARNING Any quotes or articles written by these men and institutions mentioned should be read with great skepticism. They are all bought and paid for by the Fossil fuel propaganda machine.

    Before the Flood - Top 10 Climate Deniers
    https://www.beforetheflood.com/explore/the-deniers/top-10-climate-deniers/
    TUHO
    TUHO --- ---
    +3
    In this major assessment of leading climate-change skeptic Bjørn Lomborg, Howard Friel meticulously deconstructs the Danish statistician’s claim that global warming is “no catastrophe” by exposing the systematic misrepresentations and partial accounting that are at the core of climate skepticism. His detailed analysis serves not only as a guide to reading the global warming skeptics, but also as a model for assessing the state of climate science. With attention to the complexities of climate-related phenomena across a range of areas—from Arctic sea ice to the Antarctic ice sheet—The Lomborg Deception also offers readers an enlightening review of some of today’s most urgent climate concerns.

    Lomborg Deception | Yale University Press
    https://yalebooks.yale.edu/book/9780300171280/lomborg-deception
    TUHO
    TUHO --- ---
    +1
    Tak tu mame zase Lomborga...

    Lomborg wrote in the Australian that a study “in the renowned journal” Nature, “shows that reducing emissions 95% by 2050 – almost Biden’s promise of net zero – would cost 11.9% of gross domestic product, or more than $US11,000 ($15,300) for each American citizen every year”.
    That seems like an eye-watering figure, or in Lomborg’s words “spectacularly costly”.
    The cited figure does appear in a supplementary section of the paper. But the authors of the study (which actually appeared in Nature Climate Change, not Nature) have told Temperature Check they have been asking Lomborg since early November to stop making that claim.
    Prof David Victor, of University of California San Diego, said Lomborg’s summary “took the results out of context and used them for a purpose that we explicitly said they were not to be used, and which he was reminded of when he asked for the underlying data”.
    The study used models to examine the methods and costs of reducing emissions through state-based policies compared with nationwide approaches.
    But the authors say that as they model different levels of ambition, the dollar numbers produced by the model become less reliable.
    They say that’s why the model’s outputs for beyond 80% were only placed in the supplementary section of the paper as a way to show the sensitivity of the modelling, rather than to deliver a genuine cost estimate.

    Climate cost study authors accuse Bjørn Lomborg of misinterpreting results | Graham Readfearn | The Guardian
    https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/dec/02/climate-cost-study-authors-accuse-bjrn-lomborg-of-misinterpreting-results
    TUHO
    TUHO --- ---
    A number of the new North Sea players have links to individuals and organisations known to promote misinformation on climate change and lobby against climate action.
    Orcadian Energy (formerly Pharis Energy) is a UK-based oil and gas exploration company with interest in four North Sea licences. Steve Brown, Orcadian’s founder, regularly shared posts on social media from his recently-deleted Twitter account that cast doubt on climate policy and modelling, including content from the Global Warming Policy Foundation, the UK’s principal climate science denying group.
    In May 2021, Brown tweeted out an article by Bjørn Lomborg – author of The Skeptical Environmentalist and Cool It, books that downplay the risks of global warming – about how “exaggerations about climate change” are “destroying our ability to make sensible decisions for the future”. Brown added: “This obsession with climate to the exclusion of many other issues will literally kill millions”.
    In other tweets, he said the “climate emergency” was “fake” and claimed the main cause of climate change was solar activity, not greenhouse gas emissions, which he called “benign”.
    Although the company has plans to reduce emissions when developing its latest heavy oil field and claims to be “fully committed” to the UK government’s 2050 net zero emissions goal, Orcadian’s company Twitter account also promotes a narrative popular with climate science deniers: that the world’s net-zero commitments will inevitably lead to poverty for millions. Orcardian recently tweeted about the International Energy Agency’s (IEA) recent “Net Zero by 2050” report, claiming that “If the world does this it will make energy poverty the prevailing state of being for all but the elites”.

    ‘Gathering Storm’: How ‘Rogue’ Companies are Buying up North Sea Oil and Gas - DeSmog
    https://www.desmog.com/2021/07/29/gathering-storm-how-rogue-companies-are-buying-up-north-sea-oil-and-gas/
    Kliknutím sem můžete změnit nastavení reklam