top of page

‘Follow the Science’ Leads to Ruin

Climate policy needs to take into account the costs of draconian measures, which are enormous.

Bjorn Lomborg


March 13, 2024

Viewpoint Detected:


Fallacies Detected:

Biased Language, False Dilemma, Slippery Slope, Appeal to Emotion

credAIble Evaluation:

The narrative criticizes the current approach to climate policy, particularly highlighting the potential economic and societal costs of ambitious climate goals like achieving net-zero emissions. Biased Language is used to describe climate change policies and the motivations behind them, suggesting that politicians are employing fear-mongering tactics rather than engaging in rational debate. The text presents a False Dilemma by implying the only options are either to follow current climate policies, which it views as extreme, or to face economic destruction, ignoring the possibility of balanced, sustainable approaches. A Slippery Slope argument is made by suggesting that the proposed climate policies will inevitably lead to catastrophic economic outcomes, comparable to setting global speed limits to nearly zero to prevent traffic deaths. This analogy is also an Appeal to Emotion, drawing a vivid picture of the potential consequences of climate policies to stir readers' fears about economic collapse and societal upheaval. The narrative calls for a more measured approach to climate policy, one that weighs the benefits against the costs and considers the potential for technological innovation in green energy as a more viable solution. It argues that the discourse around climate change has been skewed by alarmism and political motivations, urging for a broader discussion that includes economic considerations and the potential for innovation to address climate challenges without resorting to drastic measures.

bottom of page