The problem with Lomborg is that he wanted to ignore local conditions and look at things globally. Al Gore & company are correct to point out that many humans will suffer, and given the history of human global cooperation, I seriously doubt that those doing well are going to equitably compensate those who get harmed
The extent of current models give very wide variability in their results, and that's assuming there have not missed an important factor such as cloud formation (potentially a negative feedback loop). They certainly do NOT predict local effects such as: the effect of warming will be a rise of 2 degrees C in New York by 2100.
Even if they did, how could you build litigation around that, except in the normal sense that a clever lawyer can litigate anything, especially when a mass hysteria is running his way.
Climate change is not going to come in a night, so that everybody can see the difference. Even if the current models are borne out, it will take a century. Plenty of time, one would have thought, for farmers to adapt their crops, people to adapt their dwellings. How do you even tell, in the midst of the flux of human comings and goings and other natural changes, what is attributable to global warming? Unless the hysteria continues, in which case everything is attributable to global warming, certainly anything that has melted or warmed up anywhere. But I don't think the half-life of hysterias is long enough for that to happen. |
