Once more Mr. Lomborg sets out to obfuscate and confuse. Who are all these environmentalists "proposing an immense global campaign to cut down and burn trees"? Indeed if one looks hard you may find a preponderance of loggers and forestry engineers. Because of the complexity of the electrical grid sun shining and wind blowing is not the problem these deniers (Mr. Lomborg is indeed an agw denier) claim it to be. In fact solar is a welcome addition to the grid because it mainly produces power during peak demand periods. When forests are clear cut to produce energy, or indeed any use, the hit to our greenhouse gas budget ti huge, but not so in a responsible forest management situation. These forests are often not on good agricultural land. I am not in favor of biomass in any situation, but the criticism of biomass just deceives us into thinking the burning of biomass is equivalent to the burning of fossil fuels.Wrong
Why Mr. Lomborg continues to have a forum to try to denigrate any actions to contain and stop anthropegenic global warming is beyond me. Once again he proves to be uncanny in the deceptions he will practice to help fossil fuel consumption.
Vendana Shiva is completely right, the problem is not a lack of foodstuffs that can be grown containing enough vitamins, the problem is poverty and education. Also so long as poor third world farmers must compete with highly mechanized 1st world farms, there is no future for any of these countries. the first world countries all developed their economies through closed borders, and now dictate to the third world that there must be free trade. these are the problems, not the lack of gmo's
Mr. Lomborg has long ago lost any credibility on this subject, having sided with all sorts of crazy agw deniers in the past, only changing his tactics as the idiocy of his positions become apparent. First there was no such thing as warming or climate change, then the change was a natural cycle and not the result of human interference, finally we may be responsible for some warming but not much and it would cost so much as to send civilisation back to the dark ages. I am sure that if one were to do some checking on the statistics he spouts to banalise the problem one would probably end up on an internet site run by deniers of the same ilk. I have had enough of these people and their tactics which have already ensured that any actions we take are already very late and further inaction puts the future climate change into the very dangerous range. I sincerely believe that thirty years from now this kind of argument will be seen as having been one of the greater crimes against humanity.