Science Quote by Bjorn Lomborg

Lomborg is doing something slippery and strategic here: he borrows the language of scientific humility to smuggle in a political claim about authority. The opening nod to “tons of different hypotheses” performs open-mindedness, but it also subtly muddies the waters, implying a cacophony where the public can reasonably shrug. It’s a familiar move in climate debates: remind everyone that science is provisional, then let that provisionality read like indecision.

The pivot - “at a certain point we’ll find out who was right and who was wrong” - frames climate knowledge as a future courtroom verdict. That’s rhetorically neat and practically dangerous. Climate policy isn’t adjudicated after the fact; it’s risk management under uncertainty. Waiting for the gavel is another way of arguing for delay without saying “delay.”

Then comes the rescue line: “go with the best information right now,” which sounds like sober pragmatism. The real intent lands in the final clause: the IPCC. By invoking the IPCC as “best information,” Lomborg positions himself as aligned with mainstream science even as he’s often read as a critic of prevailing climate responses. The subtext is credential management: I’m not denying the science; I’m choosing the responsible benchmark.

Context matters: the IPCC is not a single hypothesis factory but a consensus synthesizer designed to filter “tons” into calibrated confidence. Lomborg’s phrasing flatters that role while also reminding listeners that consensus is, in theory, revisable. It’s an argument aimed at moderates: trust the process, keep your skepticism, and treat urgency as negotiable.