Lomborg claims in his rebuttal that «Holdren could find little but a badly translated word and a necessary specification for nuclear energy production in this chapter».8 Actually, as my original critique indicated to the extent practical in the space available, and as Lomborgs rebuttal and this response make even
plainer, his energy chapter is so permeated with misunderstandings, misreadings, misrepresentations, and blunders of other sorts that it can not be considered a positive contribution to
public or
policy - maker understanding, notwithstanding its managing to get right a few (already
well known) truths about the subject.
In my opinion, given the desire to use this information in
public policy, it would be
better if stiffer standards were insisted on this field — a «full, true and
plain disclosure» standard in which «fudging» was no longer tolerated (at least in this field).