Left: "Bjørn Lomborg" by Photo by Emil Jupin - http://web.archive.org/web/20070224163136/www.lomborg.com/pictures.htm. Licensed under Copyrighted free use via Wikimedia Commons. Right: Professor Noel Castree, Source University of Technology Sydney. Fair Use, Low Resolution Image to Identify the Subject.

The Conversation: We Must Seek to Understand Why Bjørn Lomborg’s Climate Arguments Resonate

Essay by Eric Worrall

According to Sydney academic Noel Castree, “denialism is in retreat”. But Climate lukewarmer Bjørn Lomborg’s arguments inexplicably resonate with lots of people.

The climate crisis is real – but overusing terms like ‘crisis’ and ‘emergency’ comes with risk

Published: September 12, 2022 6.10am AEST
Noel Castree
Professor of Society & Environment, University of Technology Sydney

“Crisis” is an incredibly potent word, so it’s interesting to witness the way the phrase “climate crisis” has become part of the lingua franca

Denialism is in retreat. The climate change debate now is about what is to be done and by whom? 

4. We must appreciate other crises and challenges matter more to many people

Some are tempted to occupy the moral high ground and imply the climate crisis is so grand as to eclipse all others. This is understandable but imprudent. 

It’s important to respect other perspectives and negotiate a way forward. Consider, for example, the way author Bjørn Lomborg has questioned the climate emergency by arguing it’s not the main threat.

Lomborg was widely pilloried. But his arguments resonated with many. We may disagree with him, but his views are not irrational. 

We must seek to understand how and why this kind of argument makes sense to so many people.

Read more: https://theconversation.com/the-climate-crisis-is-real-but-overusing-terms-like-crisis-and-emergency-comes-with-risk-188750

I find Professor Noel Castree’s article fascinating because he seems so fixated on Bjørn Lomborg.

Lomborg’s genius is exposing just how flimsy the evidence is that global warming is a problem. For example, Lomborg’s 2021 article on heatwave deaths shows the net benefits of warming, the reduction in deaths caused by cold, far outweigh any slight increase in heatwave deaths – even in warm countries like India.

My guess is Professor Castree’s own academic colleagues keep dropping Lomborg’s name in his hearing. Obviously this might just be to get a rise out of Castree, but Lomborg is good at reaching people.

If Sydney academics really are regularly reading and openly discussing Lomborg’s work, climate alarmism is in a lot more trouble than I realised.

4.9 37 votes
Article Rating
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Gregory Wrightstone
September 12, 2022 2:20 pm

Nope. Never start a climate conversation with “the climate crisis is real.” NO IT ISN’T

Mario Lento
Reply to  Gregory Wrightstone
September 12, 2022 2:59 pm

Agreed +1.
Else, it’s not a conversation. But without those words, the political heads can’t deal. And there is the basis of the problem.

Perhaps start a conversation with, “What is a crisis?” And though I digress, “What is a state of emergency… and are we in one now with (C19.xx…)?”

Reply to  Mario Lento
September 12, 2022 4:58 pm

What is a climate crisis? A miserable pile of models!

Nick Graves
Reply to  drednicolson
September 13, 2022 12:23 am

Perhaps we ought to add ‘crisis’ to everything, in order to devalue the term further:

After dealing with my morning caffeine crisis, I shall attend to my hygiene crisis and then the dog’s exercise crisis.

Chris Hanley
Reply to  Gregory Wrightstone
September 12, 2022 3:48 pm

Undoubtedly Noel will learn of this brush with international notoriety, I hope I’m not stepping on anyone’s toes when I invite him to join this conversation.

Reply to  Chris Hanley
September 12, 2022 11:54 pm

Everyone should be invited.

Without rational discourse, issues will never be resolved except by war

Reply to  Gregory Wrightstone
September 12, 2022 5:01 pm

It’s real to academic alarmists, because what a crisis they’d face if agw faded into indifference (as all “madness of crowds” events have), and they’d have to find a real job somewhere.

Reply to  Gregory Wrightstone
September 12, 2022 8:08 pm

”Climate crisis is real”

Denialism is in retreat”.

”The climate change debate now is about what is to be done and by whom? ”

It’s a pity that the Professor of ”Society and Environment” (whatever the hell that is) seems to be completely unaware of his conspicuous lack of understanding of his narrow field of view and how it has lead him to believe utter nonsense.

“He who knows only his own side of the case knows little of that. His reasons may be good, and no one may have been able to refute them. But if he is equally unable to refute the reasons on the opposite side, if he does not so much as know what they are, he has no ground for preferring either opinion… Nor is it enough that he should hear the opinions of adversaries from his own teachers, presented as they state them, and accompanied by what they offer as refutations. He must be able to hear them from persons who actually believe them…he must know them in their most plausible and persuasive form.”
John Stuart Mill

The reason we have so much misinformed garbage out there is precisely due to the ignorant ramblings from ”educators” such as Castree.

Not Dan
Reply to  Mike
September 13, 2022 3:13 am

Reminds me of a quote by Rumi.
40 academics (in the traditional sense) will change their opinion with one fact, 40 facts will not change the opinion of one idiot.
I’m paraphrasing but you get the drift.

Reply to  Gregory Wrightstone
September 13, 2022 5:44 am

The climate crisis IS REAL
Nut Zero is a crisis panic response to an imaginary climate crisis
Nut Zero is the real climate crisis.

September 12, 2022 2:26 pm

Noel seems to be attracted to blue eyes and a full head of hair.

Bryan A
Reply to  Eric Worrall
September 12, 2022 3:27 pm

“Hey Babe, wanna see the size of my Carbon Footprint?”

Pillage Idiot
Reply to  Bryan A
September 12, 2022 4:20 pm

Well, that line obviously worked for John Kerry!

Reply to  Bryan A
September 12, 2022 5:54 pm

Is that a weather balloon in your pocket?

Reply to  Bryan A
September 12, 2022 11:55 pm

“Whenever I think of you, Bjorn, my CO2 just keeps on rising”

Reply to  Scissor
September 12, 2022 8:22 pm

Tough when you look pretty much like a demented turtle.

Mike Lowe
September 12, 2022 2:35 pm

I wonder whether Professor Castree could be persuaded to enumerate precisely what signs he sees of a “climate crisis”? My belief about most of these catastrophe-believers is that they think that their 80 years-or-so is a significant period in the millions of years the Earth has existed, whereas realistic people like me know just how insignificant we are. Perhaps in aspiring to high levels in academia, their sense of proportion has become exaggerated!

Reply to  Mike Lowe
September 12, 2022 3:39 pm

Climate crisis is reflected in German and California energy prices.

Reply to  Mike Lowe
September 12, 2022 5:04 pm

When you’re a natural geological history denier, as agw acolytes are, you do think that 80 years-or-so is a significant period in the millions of years the Earth has existed.

Reply to  Mr.
September 13, 2022 3:13 am

Billions, not millions of years…..

Reply to  Mike Lowe
September 12, 2022 9:27 pm

According to griff, any weather event that is different from last year, is proof of global warming.

Reply to  MarkW
September 13, 2022 12:03 am

According to the insane climate clown-posse literally any weather event is PROOF of climate change.. hot or cold, wet or dry, rain or no rain, snow or no snow.. Literally any weather event.

Reply to  Deano
September 13, 2022 3:14 am

Yup, look at all those Atlantic hurricanes so far this season…

His Majesty
Reply to  Yooper
September 13, 2022 5:08 am

For anyone with eyes to see/who isn’t an agw denier the absence of all the predicted hurricanes is a crystal-clear indication PROOF of the climate crisis. Negative hurricanes = crisis level CO2 poisoning and climate toxicity. How dare you!

September 12, 2022 2:40 pm

There is no climate emergency but if the people do not wake up very soon there will be some disastrous emergencies ,the first one will be growing enough food to feed 8 billion people .
The second emergency will be the looming energy crisis which is starting to affect living standards in many countries ..
Countries around the world are shutting their eyes and ears and rapidly running their countries into energy deficit .
As I haves stated many times before
” IF CO2 emissions are going to heat the world there is only one solution and that is NUCLEAR POWER ”
All these politicians and scientists that are pushing global warming seem to think that 8 billion people can live reasonable lives with cut backs in energy supplies .
They cannot see or they don’t want to see that energy is essential .
Governments cannot control the weather but they can make sure that their populations have adequate energy supplies .

Steve Case
Reply to  Graham
September 12, 2022 2:55 pm

There is no climate emergency but if the people do not wake up very soon there will be some disastrous emergencies ,the first one will be growing enough food to feed 8 billion people .

And it will be blamed on Climate Change. The only question in that will be if the spin doctors are able to come up with enough bullshit for people to believe it?

Reply to  Steve Case
September 12, 2022 5:16 pm

They never need to justify. Making declarations seems to be enough to get by on.

Reply to  Steve Case
September 12, 2022 5:40 pm

Farming has become insanely efficient. We grow enough food for 7bn people. In fact looking around on the streets, it would seem that there is rather too much food for 7bn people, so we could probably stretch it out to 8bn with what we produce already.

If you want to look at the objectives of dealing with Climate Emergency, the first thing you need to do is to stop looking at climate. There is a much bigger lie, and a far more sinister objective. When they talk about reducing carbon, they mean you…

Steve Case
Reply to  Fatherknowsbest
September 12, 2022 6:20 pm

“When they talk about reducing carbon, they mean you…”

“If I were reincarnated I would wish to be returned to earth as a killer virus to lower human population levels.”

There’s evidence that the Duke of Edinburgh never said that, but someone did.

Reply to  Fatherknowsbest
September 13, 2022 5:34 am

Agreed. My back-of-the-envelope calculations say the earth could easily feed 100 billion. The “population bomb” was a dud. The U.S. is currently in a crisis of TOO MANY calories and of the wrong kind in the diet.

Reply to  Steve Case
September 13, 2022 3:16 am

In many countries they still use bullshit as fuel……

Reply to  Steve Case
September 13, 2022 4:28 pm

All Spin Doctors to the gallows, tout suite! One problem solved.

Reply to  Graham
September 12, 2022 3:04 pm

We have enough clean coal to run the US for 300 years right here in Wyoming. Plenty of oil, too, if you include TX, LA, OK, PA, etc.

Reply to  JimG1
September 14, 2022 4:28 pm

I’m seriously considering converting to a coal-fired furnace.

Reply to  Eric Worrall
September 12, 2022 4:38 pm

Eric you are absolutely correct .
Fertilizer costs are soaring from under $400 NZ per ton to $1400 NZ per tonne for urea in two years.
.Muriate of Potash is now $1600 per tonne ex store
These are eye watering prices and farmers will reduce their fertilizer costs by applying less .
Consumer prices have to increase as farmers and growers cannot produce very long with negative cash flows .
What makes this so galling here in New Zealand is that our communist Prime minister Jacinda Ardern on being elected banned all oil and gas exploration off New Zealands coasts .
We have a Urea plant in Taranaki that is powered by gas but more gas would be needed to run another one which would make so much sense.
There is plenty of gas offshore but banning exploration and development is a great way to stuff a country .

Pete Bonk
Reply to  Graham
September 12, 2022 6:25 pm

The prevalence of “slash and burn” in primitive agriculture is proof that soils getting depleted – and thus in need of fertilizers- has been observed for millennia.
How did educated people get so dumb as to not know this?????

Reply to  Graham
September 13, 2022 3:42 pm

I thought New Zealand was offshore!

Reply to  Eric Worrall
September 12, 2022 5:04 pm

Without modern fertilizers you either need to plant a replenishment crop every other year, or leave land fellow for at least two years. Doubling or tripling land use for the same yield.

Reply to  drednicolson
September 13, 2022 5:38 am

Even a “replenishment crop” (a legume) cannot fix enough nitrogen to sustain high yields, even for itself. The fixed N only partially offsets the demand.

Reply to  Eric Worrall
September 12, 2022 5:21 pm

Hearken back to the crisis of the 1890s. We don’t need EV, we need to return to horse drawn transport. If all that manure is put to the proper use we will have adequate fertilizer — at least enough to grow the horse feed.

John Hultquist
Reply to  AndyHce
September 14, 2022 10:11 pm

You could include “Night soil” in the comment.
A modern equivalent is Milorganite.

Reply to  Graham
September 12, 2022 5:11 pm

Even “the father of global warming” James Hansen stated that nuclear power generation is the only way C02 emissions from electricity production can be arrested.

But the most vocal climate catastrophists ignore Hansen’s observation, instead favoring that of Bill McKibben, Al Gore and other “luminaries”.

Chris Hanley
Reply to  Graham
September 12, 2022 5:43 pm

Australians are generally ignorant of the energy problems in Europe and UK, the MSM cannot find room for that between blanket coverage of Queen Elizabeth’s passing and of course the ongoing Prince Harry and Meghan Markle melodrama.

Pete Bonk
Reply to  Graham
September 12, 2022 6:19 pm

Graham: “ All these politicians and scientists that are pushing global warming seem to think that 8 billion people can live reasonable lives with cut backs in energy supplies .”

It’s becoming increasingly clear that those pushing the so called Green agenda have little interest in having 8 billion people live ANY life. At its core the So called Greens want drastic population reduction. And when do they want it? NOW. Pushing for fertilizer limits can have no other purpose.

Reply to  Pete Bonk
September 13, 2022 12:13 am

This insanity of pushing these fertilizer limits is going to drastically reduce yields and will ultimately end up with lots of starving people. The onset of food riots by starving people by the thousands will reduce life expectancy of the policy making governments who foist this on their citizenry…
For a case study on this, a recent country that went through this is Sri Lanka. As far as I have heard their government is still is some sort of state of transition after their senior leadership fled the country after doing this to their people.

September 12, 2022 2:46 pm

Nonsense – denialism is not in retreat but gaining momentum as witnessed by the 1100 esteemed scientists, including a Nobel prize winner, who flatly state that there is no climate crisis and that CO2 is actually helpful to the earth and mankind – the more people actually pay attention to this faux crisis and its impact on this standard of living, the more denial is accelerating

Reply to  Bill
September 12, 2022 4:47 pm

I was talking with my neighbors yesterday, a semi-retired couple who are for all intents and purposes very main stream. It was particularly cold and wet, and we got to discussing the weather and patterns. They are now starting to understand that the climate is cyclical, why there are droughts in Russia and floods in Pakistan, etc. The idea that any and all changes are caused by CO2 emitted by humans is starting to break down. I don’t expect people to turn around and say, ok, you were right all along. Instead, they will just move on, as though they never believed those things in the past. Psychologically that is fascinating.

Old Man Winter
Reply to  MarkH
September 12, 2022 5:07 pm

Thomas Sowell- It is usually futile to talk facts and analysis to
people who are enjoying a sense of moral superiority in their ignorance.

I’ve seen the same response from people who have wronged me &
“move on” as if that incident never occurred. My guess is they’re
still in that “morally superior” bubble & can’t admit to others &
possibly themselves that they were wrong. In those cases, the fact
they’re no longer doing what they did before is the only way they
can acknowledge that. Sometimes, you take what you can get!

Geoff Sherrington
Reply to  Old Man Winter
September 12, 2022 5:29 pm

The psychological process of downplaying deficiencies and positive reinforcement through charm offensives is in action right now.
A couple of generations back, a king abdicated because queens-to-be were required by tradition to not be divorced. The present guy has broken tradition not just with a divorced woman but one who all the world could see was unfaithful while Charles Iii was wrecking his own marriage. What a flaunting of tradition. No sign of abdication.
Instead we see a fawning media endlessly pushing charm (no more people playing with dogs, please) and emphasising tradition – not in its breaking, but shown by others like his mama.
A stupid display of media again pumping intellectual dishonesty into the minds of the audiences and getting paid for deception. Geoff S

Reply to  MarkH
September 12, 2022 5:10 pm

They’re undergoing a change of heart, which must usually happen before a change of mind. Pride can and will get in the way of changing the mind, but lived experience will slowly and quietly change the heart without the pride noticing.

Reply to  drednicolson
September 14, 2022 4:31 pm

Sadly, a great number of people believe internet distributed propaganda over their own personal experience. “We’ve had a perfectly normal summer, but the internet insists we’re in a major drought.”

Reply to  roaddog
September 15, 2022 7:18 am

“The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command.”

Bob Close
Reply to  MarkH
September 12, 2022 5:22 pm

You are so right Mark. As a geologist, I talk to ordinary people all the time about climate, weather and historical climate issues, and mostly they understand about natural climate change and cycles, but not how they work in detail. It’s mainly academics and the Millennials that fervently believe in AGW generated catastrophism. They have been conditioned since birth about human environmental degradation, so they expect to be worried about climate.
I just reassure people that climate isn’t a problem for them with all the other mental issues going on to worry about. However, the climate mitigation policies the woke set are implementing are a huge issue affecting us all, especially the energy disruptions caused by lack of investment in base load power and too much in unreliable renewables. Once these energy cost factors permeated through the economy like in Europe, UK and here in Australia people will finally understand they have been conned, they will take notice and we will have a proper scientific and political debate about climate to sort out what is real, and what if anything needs to be done to safeguard continued prosperity.

Reply to  Bob Close
September 13, 2022 12:18 am

…But in the meantime they are doing alot of damage and wrecking entire economies of nations while they are “sorting out what is real”…

Reply to  Deano
September 13, 2022 11:32 am

And also implementing mechanisms such as persecuting political opponents to ensure they never loose political power

Reply to  Bob Close
September 14, 2022 4:33 pm

I don’t think the people in power are going to permit rational debate.

Reply to  Bill
September 12, 2022 5:22 pm

1100 divided by 7,000,000,000 requires how many decimal places?

Bryan A
Reply to  AndyHce
September 12, 2022 8:36 pm

16 decimal places at least (as far as my calculator goes anyway)

Reply to  AndyHce
September 13, 2022 12:11 am

Are you saying there are 7billion scientists?

Bryan A
Reply to  AndyHce
September 13, 2022 5:11 am

A much larger number than 77/7,000,000,000

Reply to  Bill
September 12, 2022 8:16 pm

I don’t care what the credentials of the 1100 are, but I am very interested in their arguments and how they are rebutted by the those with differing views.

Reply to  Bill
September 12, 2022 9:30 pm

The fact that they have to spend so much time worrying about why nobody outside of the politicians takes them seriously is pretty good evidence that “denialism” is not in retreat.

jeffery p
Reply to  Bill
September 13, 2022 3:08 pm

I am not in denial!

Seriously, denialism is the incorrect term. Denialism describes people who deny natural climate change.

Reply to  jeffery p
September 14, 2022 4:35 pm

Denialism is a term of the propagandists, what they are attacking is scientific objectivity.

September 12, 2022 2:52 pm

Noel Castree is just following the current playbook.

“Denialism is in retreat. The climate change debate now is about what is to be done and by whom?”

This is same thing that Mann wants to do. Their (hopefully) last chance is stating that ‘it’ is accepted, and that now the effort needs to be directed toward how we as a society respond to the accepted ‘it’.

They can’t prove ‘it’
They can’t define ‘it’
They can’t defend that ‘it’ exists, outside of premise.

But they want to move on and discuss how to protect ourselves from ‘it’.

Noel is just another plop, right next to Mann.

Reply to  DonM
September 13, 2022 1:22 am

Castree usefully reminds us that one of the ‘benefits’ that comes from being a developed nation is being able to afford to fund pointless academics.

Not Dan
Reply to  DonM
September 13, 2022 3:30 am

And he works at UTS, a joke of an ‘institution’ nowadays. I ponder as to the ‘technology’ part. This dudette couldn’t build a simple lego structure.

Reply to  DonM
September 13, 2022 8:48 am

“Denialism is in retreat. The climate change debate now is about what is to be done and by to whom?”

Rud Istvan
September 12, 2022 2:55 pm

The professor asserts “the climate crisis is real”. That falsehood alone explains why Lomborg is persuasive to the common man and he isn’t:

  1. Arctic summer sea ice didn’t disappear so no crisis.
  2. Sea level rise did not accelerate so no crisis.
  3. GBR is thriving, so no crisis.
  4. Planet is greening, with food yields up, so no crisis.
  5. Renewables are ruinables, so IF there were a crisis, no viable solution.

The beautiful part is that this has now gone on for about 40 years, so the proclaimed crisis that isn’t becomes ever more apparent to all except such deluded Sidney professors.

Old Man Winter
Reply to  Rud Istvan
September 12, 2022 4:09 pm

From a NYT review of his book: ‘False Alarm: How Climate Change Panic Costs Us Trillions, Hurts the Poor, and Fails to Fix the Planet’
“Climate change is real, but it’s not the apocalyptic threat that we’ve been told it is. …

False Alarm will convince you that everything you think about climate change is wrong – and points the way toward making the world a vastly better, if slightly warmer, place for us all.”


He pushes back on alarmism & points out the futility of things like the Paris
Accord & their plans to fight climate change. He’s ruffled a lot of feathers
& I’m sure they’d prefer he disappeared, too!

WUWT 7/3/20
NYT Slams Bjørn Lomborg’s New Climate Economics Book

WUWT 3/24/21
Bjørn Lomborg: Questioning Spending Trillions on Climate Change Gets you Cancelled

Old Man Winter
September 12, 2022 2:56 pm

Lomborg on RE power:
“The developed world became wealthy through the pervasive use of fossil
fuels, which still overwhelmingly power most of its economies. Solar
and wind power aren’t reliable, simply because there are nights,
clouds and still days. Improving battery storage won’t help much:
There are enough batteries in the world today only to power global
average electricity consumption for 75 seconds. Even though the
supply is being scaled up rapidly, by 2030 the world’s batteries
would still cover less than 11 minutes. Every German winter, when
solar output is at its minimum, there is near-zero wind energy
available for at least five days-or more than 7,000 minutes.”

Lomborg’s effectiveness is that he hasn’t been cancelled yet & can use
facts that force them to respond, which attracts much more attention
than anything deniers say, since we can be ignored & have already
been “proven wrong”.

WUWT & Climate Depot- many posts on Lomborg.

(Originally posted on the WSJ)

Gary Kerkin
September 12, 2022 2:57 pm

Lomborg has always been open about what he understands to be happening a propos climate change. That, while acknowledging the climate is changing and that human AGW emissions are responsible, his statements of fact about climate change severity are undermining the narrative of alarmists is what concerns them the most. I see articles like that of Castree’s in The Conversation an implicit acknowledgement that the alarmists no longer have the (moral) high ground and that the only counter to “denialist” statements is to stoop to ad hominem attacks. Much of this was revealed in the “Climategate” revelations.

Chris Hanley
Reply to  Gary Kerkin
September 12, 2022 5:12 pm

while acknowledging the climate is changing and that human AGW emissions are responsible

Maybe at least partly responsible I think is Lomborg’s view.

Tom Abbott
Reply to  Chris Hanley
September 13, 2022 7:22 am

Lomborg should detail why he thinks humans are responsible for changing Earth’s weather.

I would love to see his reasoning, considering there is no evidence that human-derived CO2 is doing anything to influence the Earth’s weather.

September 12, 2022 3:12 pm

Denialism is in retreat. How can they be sure that they discovered an uncarbonated baby, and not a fetid fetus? I think they are playing a high stakes game with a double-edged scalpel.

Chris Hanley
September 12, 2022 3:25 pm

At least 6 billion people in the developing world don’t give a damn about Noel’s neurotic climate obsession, the 12,000 or so living on Tuvalu atolls notwithstanding.
Of course being a ‘Professor of Society & Environment’ at the University of Technology Sydney his piece is entirely data-free.

Reply to  Chris Hanley
September 12, 2022 5:17 pm

Not long ago, the UN (of all ‘authorities’) presented the world with the results of a 7-million people global survey of what issues mattered most to people in their pursuit of quality of life.

Global warming / climate change rated LAST of the 16 issues people rated as material to their lives.

Go figure.

Reply to  Mr.
September 12, 2022 9:35 pm

And they only gave them 16 items to rate. Had they presented 24 items in the poll, global warming probably would have come in 24th.

Zig Zag Wanderer
September 12, 2022 3:31 pm

We must seek to understand how and why this kind of argument makes sense to so many people.

But absolutely never stop to imagine that it’s because the argument is sensible

Reply to  Zig Zag Wanderer
September 14, 2022 3:15 pm

Interesting to note that a good trial lawyer would never ask this kind of question without knowing the answer before hand.

September 12, 2022 3:32 pm

AGAIN here’s Dr Hans Rosling’s 200 countries over 200 years BBC video and he completely demolishes the extremist’s nonsense in 5 minutes.
Castree is a clueless fool who BELIEVES in his stupid cult like many other donkeys in their Uni asylums all around the world.
The 200 + year DATA proves he is wrong, yet they still BELIEVE in their BARKING MAD CULT? So why don’t they want everyone to continue to benefit from the extra HEALTH and WEALTH generated by fossil fuels?

September 12, 2022 3:36 pm

We all fervently pray that climate alarmism is indeed in a lot more trouble than we realise as there seems still to be an unhealthy lot of it about.

September 12, 2022 3:38 pm

The real denial – of the fact that evidence for significant man made climate change is weak, and getting weaker – is in retreat.

Up till now its been hugely profitable to maintain the fiction, but as economies crash due to renewable energy failure, the narrative is shifting.

Expect an Augustinian reverse weasel. “Lord give me net Zero, just not right now”

Michael in Dublin
September 12, 2022 3:42 pm

Noel Castree completely ignores the World Climate Declaration.

A few extracts from this excellent and clear declaration:
“Scientists should openly address uncertainties and exaggerations in their predictions of global warming, while politicians should dispassionately count the real costs as well as the imagined benefits of their policy measures.”

“Natural as well as anthropogenic factors cause warming”

“Warming is far slower than predicted”

“Global warming has not increased natural disasters”

Compare this to Castree’s claims “Denialism is in retreat” and his certainty.
He frequently uses the words climate (23 times) and crisis (22 times).

Where is there any denialism of warming or climate change in the World Climate Declaration?
There is none!

Where does Castree acknowlege uncertainties, exaggerations, shortcomings of models, slow pace of warming, and greening because of raised CO2?
There is none!

Where does he consider adapting?
There is none!

Why does Castree connect the questionable threat of rising sea level for Tuvalu to Chicago (on Lake Michigan), Oslo (on a narrow fjord) and Cape Town (where sea level rise is the least of its problems)?

It appears Castree decided there is a climate crisis and hunted for something to support the narrative – without starting with a critical look at the science.

Stephen Dudley Haner
September 12, 2022 3:51 pm

With all due respect, Shellenberger kicks some serious butt, too! Maybe not as well know Down Under?

September 12, 2022 4:24 pm

Presumably a Professor of Society and Environment (what else is there?) has nothing to do but figure out solutions to nonexistent problems.

The debate has indeed shifted to proposed solutions because governments are pressing for them and they are nuts. That is definately an attention getter, starting with “Where is our energy?”

September 12, 2022 4:25 pm

Funny how Lomborg’s work is not irrational but is widely pilloried. What does that say about the pillorizers?

September 12, 2022 4:32 pm

All the while experts in France are panicking because apparently half of us doubt the narrative:

François Gemenne must be wetting his pants.

Dave Fair
Reply to  niceguy
September 12, 2022 9:55 pm

They offer no proof that climate metrics (hurricanes, storms, floods, droughts, heatwaves & etc.) are worsening. They have been getting away with claiming current weather extremes are made worse (more intense, frequent or longer lived) than in the past and such non-events are caused by Man’s production of GHGs. The data are there and they can keep up the charade only so long.

Climate believer
Reply to  niceguy
September 13, 2022 5:12 am

As they say in their oh so authoritative tone…”doubt is not allowed”. They actually say the quiet bit out loud.

Here’s a graph of 40 of the biggest storms that hit France between 1980 and 2019, coloured by decade, against a storm severity index.

Graph speaks for itself.

September 12, 2022 4:35 pm

The Conversation is a misnomer… they, explicitly, censor any form of “conversation” that does not support their “climate emergency” theocracy. Totally unsurprising as they are just Marxists with a thin coat of (green) paint.

Reply to  MarkH
September 12, 2022 10:43 pm

Yep. The (one way) Conversation is a good place to go to boost your cortisol levels.

John Sandhofner
September 12, 2022 4:43 pm

“Denialism is in retreat. The climate change debate now is about what is to be done and by whom? ” Not how I see it. The so called debate on what and by whom is an attempt to cover up how bad their policies are performing and push ahead as if all is well. Denialism is going in strength and influence. This whole idea will go down as one of the greatest hoax ever pulled off.

Bob Close
Reply to  John Sandhofner
September 12, 2022 10:28 pm

All the alarmists are in denial of the truth about climate !
That’s their problem, we sceptics have known reality for decades but it’s hard to get the message across to people who won’t debate the subject.
The ‘conversation’ is all about the blind talking to the deaf.

Mike Maguire
September 12, 2022 4:56 pm

“We must seek to understand how and why this kind of argument makes sense to so many people.”

Empirical data and the scientific method. They must apply it if they want to understand.

les online
September 12, 2022 4:57 pm

“Catastrophism” is a way of thinking…It’s encouraged and reinforced by all the TV programs built around Emergencies & Disasters…We absorb it subliminally when we watch the daily relational Crises of doctors, nurses, firemen, on TV…
But with so many programs doing PR for cops, showing they really are Human, you have to wonder how widespread is ill-feelings about cops. Are they widely perceived as RoboCops,
a perception enforced by their body armor and weaponry ?

les online
September 12, 2022 5:08 pm

You only crack the whip over the herd’s heads to steer them to where you want them to go…

Peter W
September 12, 2022 5:26 pm

I recently received a multiple-choice questionaire from one of the alarmist organizations sent, it was claimed, to many people in Florida. Return postage paid. I took the trouble to fill it out with responses directly the opposite of what they wanted. I also included three double-sided sheets of paper with various articles, comments, and data on the subject all disputing their claims. I do not expect any response from them, but will be interested to see if I get one. If I do receive a response, don’t expect me to ignore it.

Kevin R.
September 12, 2022 5:36 pm

The climate change debate now is about what is to be done and by whom? 

This guy is living in denial.

Dave Fair
Reply to  Kevin R.
September 12, 2022 10:01 pm

Its the same as the reaction of the wealthy NYC matron when she learned Nixon had won the Presidency: “How is that possible? Nobody I know voted for him!”

September 12, 2022 5:53 pm

The challenge of defeating belief in climatastropy at this point is that it is has become a dominant paradigm. It has had 40 years to build momentum and gain believers. Too many have too much invested in that belief – whether career, reputation or just self or group identify – to stop believing regardless of the evidence.

Net-zero, on the other hand is new and has immediate negative tangible impacts on many lives and wallets. A better conversation to have, I think, would be to demonstrate the non-renewable nature of perceived renewables.

And the best analysis of this that I’ve come across is in this YT video.

After analyzing our major uses of fossil fuels and what technologies are being proposed (or are best suited) to replace them, he calculates the mineral content needed to build them.

He then compares that to known reserves and mining production rates of those minerals and finds, briefly summarizing that..,

The known reserves of copper are only 19% of what would be needed. Nickel, 10%. Lithium < 3%. Cobalt, Graphite and Vanadium < 4%.

And even if massive new reserves are found, we would never get them mined in time to meet the Net-Zero timelines for fossil fuels that numerous states and countries are proposing. Based on 2019 production levels, the number of years needed to mine enough copper: 189, Nickel: 400, Lithium; 9.9k, Cobalt: 1.7k.

If enough people see this it might make a difference. I don’t know if it’s on Rumble or not but hopefully it will be before YT disappears it. Please share far and wide.

Reply to  Thallstd
September 12, 2022 8:54 pm

That video should be compulsory viewing. As much as he tried to put a positive spin that we can find a solution, you came away with the feeling he and everyone in his audience knew that Electrification is never going to happen.

Here the total metals required for one generation of technology to phase out fossil fuels is listed by Required Production followed by Known Reserves for all metals based upon tonnes, as follows:

Copper 4,575,523,674 vs. 880,000,000 – a serious shortfall -reserves only cover 20% of requirements.

Zinc 35,704,918 vs. 250,000,000 – adequate reserves.

Manganese 227,889,504 vs 1,500,000,000 – adequate reserves

Nickel 940,578,114 vs. 95,000,000 – huge shortfall – reserves 10% of requirements.

Lithium 944,150,293 vs. 95,000,000 = huge shortfall – reserves 10% of requirements.

Cobalt 218,396,990 vs. 7,600,000 – huge shortfall – reserves 3.48% of requirements.

Graphite 8,973,640,257 vs. 320,000,000 = huge shortfall – 3.57% reserves of requirements.

Silicon (metallurgical) 49,571,460 – adequate reserves

Silver 145,579 vs. 530,000 – adequate reserves

Vanadium 681,865,986 vs. 24,000,000= huge shortfall -3.52% reserves of requirement

Zirconium 2,614,126 vs.70, 000,000 – adequate reserves.

Besides the obvious this list does make a very good basis for an investment strategy.

Reply to  Simonsays
September 13, 2022 3:45 am

Hey, can’t graphite: C, be made from coal, another C?

Reply to  Yooper
September 13, 2022 3:58 am

Maybe, but nobody will be allowed to mine coal after the great reset.

Dave Andrews
Reply to  Simonsays
September 13, 2022 7:33 am

I reckon that China and India and many other countries in Asia and Africa will largely ignore the West’s preoccupation with climate change and the great reset will mean nothing to them.

Not Dan
Reply to  Thallstd
September 13, 2022 1:03 pm

Thanks Thallstd for the video as it clearly outlines the challenges that the green zealots do not want to hear nor can they comprehend.
I will be passing on to many of my associates.

Jeff L
September 12, 2022 5:59 pm

I find this hilarious – they can’t understand why someone who makes arguments using actual data (not computer models) is actually credible. Hahaha !
That data stuff is so old school – it must be canceled ! (sarcasm intend)

September 12, 2022 6:06 pm

It is professors like Castree that give professors a bad name. He presents no research, no facts, no studies, no nothing. Just sits on his backside declaring victory and blaming the message for the lack of support for his pseudo cause. Typical green devil, figuring he can coast to the finish line on his credentials and education. If he wants people to believe him he has to do real research, show valid results that match observations you know do real work. He is a crackpot and I put no stock in him.

Reply to  Bob
September 13, 2022 9:26 am

I have found that second tier professors such as this guy tend to be hangers-on, doing little or no research on their own to either confirm or refute the catastrophe narrative. They just unquestioningly regurgitate the same climate talking points and copy other people’s work rather than create their own, original content. Poor scholarship. I would not let my child sit under their pedagogy.

Reply to  Pflashgordon
September 13, 2022 8:25 pm

I am sure you are right.

September 12, 2022 8:30 pm

One thing is very clear. We need “Professors” of “Society and the Environment” even less than a “Ministry of Silly Walks”.

I wonder if he’s bright enough to be trained to flip burgers?

Doubtful if he’s honest enough for that, however.

Pat from kerbob
September 12, 2022 9:13 pm

Personally I think denial is rampant.the climate Scientologists deny Europe is in deep trouble due to the embrace of green insanity.
They deny undeniable technical resources on the impossibility of net zero.
They deny any natural component to climate change even though the current warming period has been going on far longer than any added co2.

I see denialism everywhere.

Reply to  Pat from kerbob
September 13, 2022 12:36 pm

They also deny geological natural history.

September 12, 2022 9:24 pm

“denialism is in retreat”.

and there are no Americans in Baghdad.

Dave Fair
Reply to  MarkW
September 12, 2022 10:05 pm

“Those are not the Droids you are looking for.” seems to be working for the CliSciFi profiteers.

September 13, 2022 12:59 am

Truth resonates, verifiable facts, common sense, irrefutable logic, accurate history, calm presentation…..

Ever shriller desperate hyper alarmism, personal attacks and career destruction, refusal to debate whilst claiming the debate won, corrupting and coopting…. not so credible.

September 13, 2022 1:09 am

According to The Conversation’s website:

“The Conversation is an independent source of news analysis and informed comment written by academic experts, working with professional journalists who help share their knowledge with the world.”

Strange then that they never seem to publish sceptical articles – maybe instead of slagging off Lomborg, they should give him the opportunity to explain his side of the story.

Coeur de Lion
September 13, 2022 2:50 am

I’m interested in what Prof Castries thinks “should be done”. Has he a suggestion? Invade China and blow up their coal fired power stations? Might work.

September 13, 2022 3:29 am

Lomborg uses empirical data to demonstrate the benefits of the industrial revolution to humanity. That’s what folk see as common sense. Claiming that the same system will have catastrophic failure in 100 years requires a very clear, logical explaination of the steps and failed mitigations that will lead to that failure that folk can see as commonsense. I’m afraid starting with a religious belief in climate catastrophy and asking folk to give up so much without hard evidence of new insurmountable problems will fail the commonsense test.

His Majesty
September 13, 2022 4:47 am

We must seek to understand how and why this kind of argument makes sense to so many people.”

Because there are a few rational people left on the planet that aren’t ruled by the mob nor their thinking by their emotions? Noel Castree is incredulous, and in denial himself. He doesn’t seek understanding, but rather wants the mob to learn how to debilitate and silence Lomborg and inoculate the masses against ‘dangerous’ independent and rational thought.

September 13, 2022 5:21 am

Funny how he says skepticism is in retreat, yet he is signaling that alarmism is in retreat. He uses the word “crisis,” which is a step backwards for the climate worriers. Their current term of choice is “EMERGENCY!!!,” yet he has backed it down to crisis level. Then he openly admits that the alleged climate crisis is not the highest threat or priority. He goes on to grant that Lomborg’s views are rational.

It looks like he is trying to save face as he prepares for the collapse of the climate porn industry.

Bruce Cobb
September 13, 2022 5:22 am

The Climate Caterwaulers need a new word. How about “conflagration”, as in “Climate Conflagration”? It keeps that all-important aliteration, with the implication that the planet, or maybe the climate is on fire, which we have the ability if not the will, to put it out.

Bill Parsons
Reply to  Bruce Cobb
September 13, 2022 8:37 pm

1,550,000 hits on Google. The caterwauling climate conflagrationists cottoned on to that long ago.

Brian J. BAKER
September 13, 2022 6:04 am

Wait until more of his friends start reading Michael Schellenberger.

Peter W
September 13, 2022 9:50 am

The Wall Street Journal had a most interesting editorial today (9/13/2020) pointing out that China is going overboard building coal-powered electric generating plants. Their CO2 emissions increased an estimated 11 % from 2015 to 2021 while those of the US reduced by about 6%. I would say it is pretty obvious we are fighting a losing battle. Fortunately, we see no decrease in our plant growth, thanks to the Chinese.

September 13, 2022 11:25 am

People who believe there is a climate emergency caused by human behavior should take personal action based on their belief. The first action is to sterilize yourself immediately upon turning 18. The second action is to refuse all transportation options and walk everywhere. The third action is to refuse to heat or cool your living space. The fourth action is to adopt the belief of bodhisattva and eliminate yourself to save others.

September 13, 2022 11:42 am

A sophomoric debating tactic is to misquote what your opponent said and then refute the false strawman.

To answer the Professor’s question: Bjorn’s argument makes sense because he uses data and not hyperbole.

Bill Parsons
Reply to  George Daddis
September 13, 2022 8:50 pm

I was going to write a much longer hyperbolic reply to the question (He’s the best at what he does)… but this is the gist of it. I’d add that he avoids ad hom attacks and disarms his oponents with recent and relevant studies. Some kind of genius.

Without knowing much about Professor Castree other than his unfortunate last name it appears he is himself loath to take up specifics, referring patronizingly to Lomborg as some kind of strangely dangerous oddity who should be studied.

Lawrence Ayres
September 14, 2022 6:28 pm

I always ask the believers to define the climate catastrophe they are so worried about. They invariably say there are more storms or more rain or more droughts and when you tell them the data says otherwise they change the subject. So climate change is closely aligned with ignorance. Being a professor does not make you wise and if you are ignorant you cannot be knowledgeable and therefore should simply be ignored.

September 17, 2022 3:44 am

Maybe because he’s right???

Verified by MonsterInsights