I was initially excited about this book providing a new perspective on how to make the world a better place. I saw some negative reviews but assumed they were written by the same type of idealistic environmentalist types that Lomborg is trying to argue against, and so didn't pay much attention to them.

After reading the book, I tried to learn more about the claims made in the book, and it started to feel more and more like the facts had been misrepresented in order to make Lomborg's argument more compelling. For a summary of some of the issues, you can see www.lomborg-errors.dk/ or the complaints to the Danish Committees on Scientific Dishonesty.

This was very disappointing to me. I think it is possible there is still a kernel of truth to Lomborg's argument and it is unfortunate if it is lost due to making arguments in bad faith with hidden agendas. If there is some truth to this argument that we are attempting to solve the climate problem in the wrong way, then I hope that someone can do this work in a more intellectually honest way, adapting the argument to take into account criticism/suggestions by other experts. Hopefully Lomborg's style of argument hasn't done too much to destroy the credibility of any similar research.