More Criticisms and Comments on The Skeptical Environmentalist

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

The Union of Concerned Scientists examines The Skeptical Environmentalist (http://www.ucsusa.org/environment/lomborg.html). Detailed responses from Peter Gleick on the book¿s treatment of water resources, Jerry Mahlman on global warming, and Edward O. Wilson, Thomas Lovejoy, Norman Myers, Jeffrey Harvey and Stuart Pimm on biodiversity and species loss.

Something is Rotten in the State of Denmark ( http://www.gristmagazine.com/grist/books/lomborg121201.asp). From Grist magazine, a series of essays criticizing the book, including E. O. Wilson on extinction, Stephen Schneider on global warming, Norman Myers on species diversity, Lester Brown on population, Emily Matthews on forests, Al Hammond on statistical errors, Devra Davis on human health, and David Nemtzow on energy, and more.

www.Anti-Lomborg.com. A site established by environmental activists, academics and writers to rebut Lomborg¿s writings

On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.

Debunking Pseudo-Scholarship: Things a journalist should know about The Skeptical Environmentalist (http://www.wri.org/press/mk_lomborg.html). From the World Resources Institute, several articles including a review of the book by Edward Flateau, an article Al Hammond and Tony Janetos, and the text of an address by Peter Raven.

The Lomborg File: When the Press is Lured by a Contrarian¿s Tale (http://www.cjr.org/year/02/2/bakerbook.asp). An article by Russ Baker, published by The Columbia Journalism Review, concerning why Lomborg¿s message proved so appealing to the general media.

Replies from Danish scientists (http://www.au.dk/~cesamat/debate.html). When Lomborg¿s book was first published several years ago in Denmark, members of the Danish scientific and academic community posted rebuttals to it that prefigured the debate now occurring internationally.

Back to Skepticism toward The Skeptical Environmentalist

It’s Time to Stand Up for Science

If you enjoyed this article, I’d like to ask for your support. Scientific American has served as an advocate for science and industry for 180 years, and right now may be the most critical moment in that two-century history.

I’ve been a Scientific American subscriber since I was 12 years old, and it helped shape the way I look at the world. SciAm always educates and delights me, and inspires a sense of awe for our vast, beautiful universe. I hope it does that for you, too.

If you subscribe to Scientific American, you help ensure that our coverage is centered on meaningful research and discovery; that we have the resources to report on the decisions that threaten labs across the U.S.; and that we support both budding and working scientists at a time when the value of science itself too often goes unrecognized.

In return, you get essential news, captivating podcasts, brilliant infographics, can't-miss newsletters, must-watch videos, challenging games, and the science world's best writing and reporting. You can even gift someone a subscription.

There has never been a more important time for us to stand up and show why science matters. I hope you’ll support us in that mission.

Thank you,

David M. Ewalt, Editor in Chief, Scientific American