Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Sharks in the Septic Tank -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Thomas M. who wrote (40900)	12/13/2001 2:09:07 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 82486

From your gristmagazine.com link "Another claim by Lomborg -- that global forest cover has remained remarkably stable over the past 50 years -- is based on two acts of statistical conjuring. First, he expresses changes in forest cover as a percentage of the total land area of the world, a technique that reduces changes of millions of hectares to fractions of 1 percent. Second, he cobbles together a variety of different data sources compiled using different definitions of forest and different methodologies. " The first part is not statisitical conjuring. If the percentage of the world covered by forest has not changed much in the last 50 years then there has not been a lot of global loss of forest. Those millions of hectares might be a significant local issue in several places but he was not talking about local issues but the world wide forest cover. As for the second accusation I would like to see Bjorn Lomborg's response. Tim