Hacker News Reader

Comment by olivermarks | Hacker News Reader

I strongly recommend 'Apocalypse Never: Why Environmental Alarmism Hurts Us All' by Michael Shellenberger https://read.amazon.com/kp/embed?asin=B07Y8FHFQ7&preview=new...

View on HN

I wasn't overly impressed by Apocalypse Never. It has some interesting tidbits, sure. But ultimately a lot of the argument was about reframing harm as deaths instead of dollars: we have better technology so we can avoid deaths from natural disasters. That's good but if we are causing natural disasters to be worse and the sea level to rise that's still something we should seek to avoid.

I found Unsettled, [1] by former Caltech provost Steven Koonin to be much more compelling. The approach is rigorous and scientific. The author is not partisan. He did work for BP but also served in the Obama administration. He brings to the climate debate a rational skepticism that is typically discouraged in polite/liberal company. IMO it was at least 2x as compelling as Apocalypse Never.

1: https://www.amazon.com/Unsettled-Climate-Science-Doesnt-Matt...

Really, don't bother https://climatefeedback.org/evaluation/article-by-michael-sh...

What’s the summary?

Nuclear and shale gas shill writes how technology will solve everything.

as opposed to solar and wind "shills" who say humanity is doomed if the government doesn't funnel billions of dollars to their industries? Each side has monetary incentives to push their view point

Fact is that without the fear mongering about nuclear energy decades ago we'd probably be carbon neutral by now

Maybe it'd be better to read the opinions of relevant faculty instead. I know at least one climate science faculty who has publicly referred to Shellenberger as a "professional asshole" after being treated so poorly by Shellenberger.

Shellenberger is just next in the long list of industry shills who peddle the same misinformation and then complain when researchers get mad at him, claiming endless victimhood.

As hominem attacks are not a good way to discredit an argument though.

Shellenberger's arguments have been discredited for decades. At some point, it is just a denial of service attack against researchers with better things to do with their time when he says "fight me fight me fight me fight me" over and over. It is the same rhetorical trick. At some point, you just get frustrated and call somebody an asshole and move on.

Yes, it isn't sound logical thinking to say "tons of relevant experts in this field think this guy is an idiot." But it definitely is a strong bayesian update.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com