Bjorn Lomborg debated Bill McKibben at Middlebury College recently, and a video of the event can be accessed online from the college library. I am surprised this hasn’t received more attention, as it shows the keys differences between the environmental advocacy argument and the mild skeptic argument in a straightforward way.
Lomborg is a PhD economist specialising in statistics. McKibben is an author of books on a variety of subjects, gravitating strongly to environmental themes.
As I don’t want to prejudice anyone’s opinion before viewing, I will withhold commentary for a polite amount of time to allow folks to watch the video. I estimate that something over half of my readers are mild-to-moderate enviroskeptics, yet there are also a few full-throated environmentalists here. To all viewers I would note that both speakers in the video make some solid points that are not entirely answered by the other. Keep your ears on.
After 10 minutes of introduction and setting the stage by a Middlebury professor from the environmental studies dept, Lomborg speaks for 45 minutes, then McKibben for 25. Both are engaging enough speakers to hold your attention. There is then time of rebuttal and submitted questions. The whole shebang takes about 2 hours. I know none of you has that kind of time to spare, but as this encapsulates issues that would take you many hours of reading to acquire a knowledge of, I think you will find it worth it.