Comments for Blog Review 651 at http://adamsmith.org , comment 1 to 3 out of 3 comments http://adamsmith.org Fri, 21 Nov 2008 01:55:29 +0100 FeedCreator 1.7.3 http://adamsmith.org/blog/misc/blog-review-651-200807071666/#comment-583 An economist inspired the thoughts of some biologists who went on to explain the origins and complexity of all life on this planet. Yeah, I'm sure biologists are annoyed at that outcome. - Philip Thomas Sat, 12 Jul 2008 00:49:53 +0100 http://adamsmith.org/blog/misc/blog-review-651-200807071666/#comment-564 Nor have they much respect for evidence: even their economic analysis is rubbished [Dasgupta on Stern] Economists on climate are diverted by unsubstantiated propaganda. Another example if diversion is this: "Lomborg and others' favorite diversionary tactic is the abuse of the concept "opportunity cost". But again, in practice it's only the opportunites foregone by the rich polluter which mean anything, while the allegedly better things which can be done for the poor are never going to be done regardless - they're just fraudulent debate points. (If Kyoto or something similar were not implemented, the "costs" saved wouldn't then be spent in the 3rd world, the 1st world would just pocket them.) http://www.economist.com/blogs/freeexchange/200 Lord Stern s alarming arithmetic is worst. Longterm climate analysis shows no unprecedented warming, There is no evidence that miniscule apres ice age warming in 20 C is influenced by man. Now adapting to increased oil price-thats a serious problem - Dr Alister McFarquhar Tue, 08 Jul 2008 13:58:27 +0100 http://adamsmith.org/blog/misc/blog-review-651-200807071666/#comment-552 That Darwin and Wallace were influenced by Malthus wouldn't be a surprise to any biologist. The Darwin association, at least, is very well known. Looks to me more like another example of economists not knowing their biology. - David Jones Mon, 07 Jul 2008 15:06:33 +0100