MemeMachineGo!

The Danish Committee on Scientific Dishonesty has concluded that the "Skeptical Environmentalist" was scientifically dishonest.

"Objectively speaking," the committees found, "the publication of the work under consideration is deemed to fall within the concept of scientific dishonesty," as defined by Danish rules for scientific integrity. But because Dr. Lomborg was not found grossly negligent, he could not be found formally to have been scientifically dishonest, the report said.

As Henning Bertram says over at American Samizdat, "in less polite terms: he is an obfuscator, but just may be too dumb to realize it."

Meanwhile, the Worldwatch Institute concludes we only have a generation or two to save ourselves.

The longer that no remedial action is taken, the greater the degree of misery and biological impoverishment that humankind must be prepared to accept, the institute says in its 20th annual report.

A meat eater concludes vegans were right all along.

Biotechnology — whose promoters claim that it will feed the world — has been deployed to produce not food but feed: it allows farmers to switch from grains which keep people alive to the production of more lucrative crops for livestock. Within as little as 10 years, the world will be faced with a choice: arable farming either continues to feed the world's animals or it continues to feed the world's people. It cannot do both.

As a meat-eater, I've long found it convenient to categorise veganism as a response to animal suffering or a health fad. But, faced with these figures, it now seems plain that it's the only ethical response to what is arguably the world's most urgent social justice issue. We stuff ourselves, and the poor get stuffed.

What we do matters. What are you willing to do and not do?