Lomborg's The Skeptical Environmentalist (2001)

Bjørn Lomborg's *The Skeptical Environmentalist* remains the most divisive cost-benefit analysis in climate policy, sparking outrage from environmental scientists who argued its statistical framing minimized urgent threats. The Danish Committees on Scientific Dishonesty initially ruled the work scientifically dishonest—a verdict later overturned after intense academic debate—underscoring how the book's selective use of 2,000 data points provoked lasting distrust. Compared to the consensus-driven IPCC reports, Lomborg's explicit prioritization of economic efficiency over precautionary action polarized policymakers more sharply than #2's climate skepticism studies, with critics noting that 35% of his cited sources were misrepresented.