Lensman wrote:Burt Rutan, the noted aerospace engineer, is no climatologist, but has written an analysis of the subject concentrating on how well climatologists have analyzed the evidence-- or rather, how poor their scientific procedure is. Just because he's not a climatologist doesn't mean he can't make valid observations about the field.
Except his analysis was posted here, and it was nonsense.
Lensman wrote:CAGW alarmists have tried to dismiss the analysis of Bjørn Lomborg, too, on the basis that he's an economist and not a climatologist. But his "Are We Doing the Right Thing?" analysis still makes valid and significant points.
Agreed. I never understood the antipathy towards him.
As to whether AGW will be catastrophic, I would guess not, at least not as I would define catastrophic. Catastrophic to some individuals, sure, but a lack of global warming will also be catastrophic to some individuals. I wish I could be sure about it not being catastrophic to us as a species, though. In any case, it does look like it will be expensive, and I think switching to LFTRs or IFRs instead of coal, and reducing the oil used in transportation, will save money in the long run.
Deasil is the right way to go.