A very good explanation on the relationship of "scientific statements " and the underlying assumptions, in this case ethical ones. You can agree or not with the author choices, but you have a good base to make your own. Clear, concise, good prose.

Economic theory is not always easy to understand but this article explains a complex topic very well.

It is all about ethics, and a reminder that everyone has to consider ethics in deciding to do anything or not to do anything, and if it is to, what to do, if not, then what not to do. True, but not the whole question. What are the choices available, are they proved solutions to proved problems, or just unsubstantiated claims, hopes, deceptions or just disguised cant, trotted out by ancient religious bigots?

A well reasoned discussion of the balance between immediate rewards and delayed rewards from a societal perspective. But by choosing a seriously flawed example as his prime point of discussion (global warming) Broome seriously undermines his credibility. Even before attempting to weigh the effects of various policy choices to address a problem, the analyst has a more important ethical obligation to consider the observations and science involved, and to apply the appropriate ... More »

This opinion piece has modest journalistic merit. The author does not reference and may not even have read the reports from the Copenhagen Consensus, the most influential expert group studying the costs and benefits of dealing with major world problems. The author ignores the benefits of warmer climates, such as longer growing seasons and less danger from death from cold. Assuming only costs from changing climate is not rational.