[sophacles]

> The environmental impact if windmills are pretty large.

Do you have any citation for this? Any source that hasn't been debunked thoroughly? Has anyone not currently under multiple indictments for fraud ever suggested this in a serious way?

[phpisthebest]

Is Michael Shellenberger currently under "multiple indictments for fraud" please cite those...

[sophacles]

I don't know who that is. Presumably someone you are using as an example of someone who seriously suggests that we should burn more coal to prevent windmills, possibly by some argument about windmills killing birds and whales... an argument that ignores all the birds, whales, humans, and other animals killed by coal.

[phpisthebest]

>I don't know who that is.

Nuclear Energy Advocate / Activist and author... Also has a new Documentary coming out about Wales and Wind.

>Presumably someone you are using as an example of someone who seriously suggests that we should burn more coal

Unlikely, he supports Nuclear as the resolution for Fossil Fuels.

[the_gastropod]

First, Shellenberger is not a scientist of any sort. He has a degree in Peace and Global Studies and another in Anthropology. Reading his writing, it's abundantly clear he doesn't understand the science he's writing about (as a hot tip for life: anyone claiming to have a tidy solution to highly complex and uncertain problems is both: probably wrong, and probably selling you something)

Like "Intelligent Design" practitioners, Shellenberger's work is not science. He starts with his conclusion in mind, and cherry-picks supporting evidence for it. And many of the things he cherry-picks are clearly in bad-faith and deliberately misleading. One such example, in his book "Apocalypse Never", he argues that climate change has no impact on fires, stating: "As for the Amazon, The New York Times reported, correctly, that the ‘fires were not caused by climate change.’" He cites this NYTimes article: [1] The entire point of the paragraph he snipped this quote from was the exact opposite. Here's the full quote:

> These fires were not caused by climate change. They were, by and large, set by humans. However, climate change can make fires worse. Fires can burn hotter and spread more quickly under warmer and drier conditions.

He's also just dead wrong about many things in this book. One easy example, he claims that "climate change so far has not resulted in increases in the frequency or intensity of many types of extreme weather". This is comically misinformed. There are countless peer-reviewed studies demonstrating the causal relationship. [2] [3] [4]

Shellenberger has a bad habit of either misunderstanding or purposefully misrepresents actual working scientists, while weirdly masquerading as if he is equally qualified. [5]

Is this criminal fraud? No. But Shellenberger seems like a grifter, selling the Breitbart crowd contrarian takes that they want to hear.

[1] https://www.nytimes.com/2019/08/23/world/americas/amazon-fir...

[2] https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.1920849117

[3] https://journals.ametsoc.org/bams/article/101/3/E303/345043/...

[4] https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/scientists-can-no...

[5] https://climatefeedback.org/evaluation/article-by-michael-sh...