Just as I finished looking at Krugman’s mature piece, I ran into this doozy: ”

The ‘Wall Street Journal’ Parade of Climate Lies”

I was quite excited to see what sorts of science was being peddled and interested to see the research to debunk it. But then I noticed the author was none other than Economist Jeff Sachs. He is no more qualified to weigh in on the climate debate than I am, and despite his awesomeness as an economist (I believe that) and his awesomeness at helping the world’s poor, I am pretty sure that I have grappled more with the climate science and economics literature than he has. If I were to write a piece on either side of the climate debate that touched on anything other the economic responses to a warmer planet, I would be deemed a hack, unqualified and all sorts of other things. But nope, if you are a famous person, your thoughts on anything matter.

Incidentally, I had not noticed the Ridley piece until I saw this Sachs piece. It turns out that Ridley has responded. And no surprise here given my hackish, biased, partisan leanings, whether you agree with Ridley or not, he calls Sachs out on his poppycock and scientific masquerade, I don’t expect a sincere response or exchange. So here we are, just like in a University setting (not that I have firsthand experience), a chance for people to actually learn something about an important topic devolves into ad hominem attacks, name calling, questioning affiliations and nastiness, with people on “both sides” (are there?) retreating further into their tribes.

Less than two weeks into the term and my mind is already planning the next outdoor adventure.