Elrich’s reputation as a scientist is at the top. A scientist does not a social commentator make.

Anyway you deluded right wing fascists have to go on the attack using irellevant issues as your focus, because your arguments dont’ stand on their merits…

Tamas is right as usual about the vast improvement in world hunger and deaths from droughts and floods since the early 20th century.

I would suggest that the kdkd mindset is all about pessimism and the psychological need for the threat of ‘Gores and rumours of Gores’ to get attention. Comes from the need for attracting research grants and squealing the scariest story to keep a job in ‘climate science’.

Exaggerate threats grossly, scare people sh*tless, thousands become millions, what might happen in 2000 years will happen within 50 years et.. cetera..et.. cetera.

When a couple of interested late nighters (Tamas and myself) can expose the systematic errors, exaggerations and areas of serious doubt about AGW alarmist facts, it shows how really pathetic and derivative are the paid ’scientists’ who arrogantly and dupliciously claim that the debate is over.

When kdkd gets a bit older and wiser he will be able to do an “Ehrlich” on the Flannerys, Karolys, Gliksons and their mimics; in bedtime stories to his grandkids.

I figure I am a couple of years older that you both, and when I was a callow student Dr Paul Ehrlich and Ralph Nader were campus heroes.

I well remember Dr Ehrlich when his sideburns were dark and his youthful intensity blew away all serious opposition to his doomsday predictions. There was a particular ABC Monday Conference where Dr Ehrlich was the star turn and his opposition was a certain Dr Colin Clarke (demographer RC with 10 kids I think). The kiddies (me amongst them) all laughed at Dr Clarke as a hopeless old fart, done like a dinner by the luminous Paul Ehrlich.

Well, time has proven the hopeless old fart to be in fact Dr Paul Ehrlich – still groping for credence amongst a new generation who don’t know the history.

I hope Dr Clarke is enjoying his rehab in a high place.

And speaking of fat film makers …add Al Gore to Michael Moore in the gluttony stakes.

I believe Al gets easily distracted by a passing plate of potato pancakes.

The dollar view of economics is clearly useful, but it does have its limits. You appear to want to be able to (selectively) ignore science because you seem to think that the dismal science is more important and can anticipate potential problems more accurately. I’m afraid that just because you don’t believe in them, it doesn’t mean the laws of ecology go away.

What specific numbers do you think are dodgy? Let me know and I’ll find some links for you.

I know it’s tough for you kdkd. A more prosperous world doesn’t fit with your doomsday predictions. But… well… bad luck. Good luck for the rest of humanity though.

Your scientific illiteracy goes well with your view that there’s nothing more important than a dollar view of economics.

Your figures there are unverifiable. I won’t take them seriously without sourcing.

Nice head in the sand job there anyway delusion boy.

Erlich is “one of the most respected scientists of the last 50 years”??? Boy, science has bigger problems than I thought.

Erlich is a crank and a doomsayer. He has been proven wrong again and again.

On world hunger, you are wrong – as usual. Here is Indur Goklany in a recent letter to The Economist:

“Access to safe water, improved sanitation, crop yields and life expectancy has never been higher in the history of mankind. This is true for both the developing and developed worlds. Much of this has been enabled, directly or indirectly, by economic surpluses generated by the use of fossil fuels and other greenhouse-gas generating activities such as fertilisers, pumping water for irrigation and using farm machinery. Crop yields are higher than ever partly because of higher concentrations of CO2, without which yields would be zero.

You then submitted that global warming is causing both droughts and floods. Regardless of whether this is the case, deaths from droughts have declined by 99.9% since the 1920s, and from floods by 99% since the 1930s. In fact, since the 1920s average annual deaths from all extreme-weather events have dropped by 95% while annual death rates, which factor in population growth, have been reduced by 99%.”

I might add that billions have been lifted out of poverty in the past 30 years and humanity is richer than ever. 4 billion people now have phones, up from only a billion just 15 years ago. More children go to school than ever before, literacy is at its highest levels ever. And so on and on and on.

The world just keeps getting better kdkd. I know you like being miserable and pessimistic, but ironically enough this good news will probably make you even more miserable. So everyone’s a winner.

Yeah, environmentalists have a habit of overstating their case somewhat. On the other hand, he’s not really wrong, just in the wrong time scale. Nice to see you describing one of the most respected scientists of the last 50 years as a “whacko”. You clearly know how to destroy your credibility through overt display of ignorance.

I’ve been impressed with Dimitri Orlov (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dmitry_Orlov). As he shows repeatedly, these kinds of projections tend to be correct but on a longer time scale than the original prediction.

And world hunger is a big problem. I guess you can’t tell the difference between it being a big problem, and not being a big problem for *you*. Good work delusion boy, you will make the universe revolve around you yet, take that Newton!

“The battle to feed all of humanity is over. In the 1970s and 1980s hundreds of millions of people will starve to death in spite of any crash programs embarked upon now. At this late date nothing can prevent a substantial increase in the world death rate..”

Bwahahahahaha!!!! aaaahahahahahahahah!!!!!! Ohh… it’s just too good. You can’t make this stuff up.

Well, global warming is the latest made-up eco-scare but who listens to kooks like Erlich anymore? ah, yeah, sorry kdkd.