Climate gadfly
Bjørn Lomborg is the guy climate change interventionists love to hate. They wrongly group him with the climate change "deniers," when his brief is not against the fact of climate change, only what to do about it.
Indeed, we need someone like Lomborg, to point out the human consequences of climate change intervention. But his solution of combating more pressing problems, especially mortality rates in developing countries, also has consequences.
Plagues like malaria, HIV/AIDS and starvation, cruel as they are, are part of nature's balance. What good is a policy, like Lomborg's, aimed at saving lives, if those saved lives add to the world's energy expenditure and overwhelm already-strained resources? What does the intervention of sentimental humanitarians in equatorial Africa achieve, other than to increase the population load on a land already suffering chronic famine?
Yes, Bjørn, we must consider the consequences, yours as well as those of the climate change interventionists.
