The Brown University Spectator:A Journal of Conservative and Libertarian Thought
Get The Brown Spectator delivered to your emailGet The Brown Spectator delivered to your email
Subscribe to The Brown Spectator's RSS feedSubscribe to The Brown Spectator's RSS feed

Kurtzman Responds

By Andrew Kurtzman Response

Rate this article:

1 Star2 Stars3 Stars4 Stars5 Stars (No Ratings Yet)
Loading ... Loading ...

Mr. Stern, for all of his admirable bravado, apparently fails to read my original article. Mr. Stern is free, as he does, to contest the arguments in Swindle. This, however, entirely misses my point. My thesis, as I made clear many times throughout my article, is that arguments that global warming is caused by CO2 emissions are based on imprecise science, and grounded in a sensationalizing culture that has been encouraging grander and grander claims about the danger that these emissions pose. At present, no one knows how dangerous, if at all, these emissions truly are. Citing Swindle, I argued that we cannot “err on the safe side” by cutting all emissions, without attending to the economic consequences of doing so. As Swindle (and many academic papers) shows, this causes a wealth reduction which falls particularly hard on the developing world. Those who question the danger posed by carbon emissions are increasingly demonized, in the manner of Holocaust deniers, by those such as Mr. Stern who do not acknowledge (or do not understand) the politics of science.

Be the First to Comment »

No comments yet.

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URL

Leave a comment