Comments on: Global warming predictions

By: Vernon

Vernon — Mon, 25 Jun 2007 15:53:11 +0000

I am not a climate scientist but it seems to me that an easy way to shut down all the discussion by skeptics. Dr. Mann and Dr. Schmidt may be completely correct or completely wrong, but if they are right, then why not just force the deniers to admit that they are by doing two things?

First, publicly post all the raw data, processes, procedures, and algorithms used to reach their conclusions? Once everyone can check the data and math, there will be nothing to argue over.

Second, do additional testing to show that the long term proxies actually capture the temperature record. Pretty much this is easy to do too. Go back to the tree ring site originally used and collect the core samples for the last 30-40 years. Then show that the proxies match the instrumented readings.

Once these two things are done, there should not be much to argue over and we can get down to determining the impact of our actions and the appropriate actions we need to take.

By: Mark Hill

Mark Hill — Fri, 15 Jun 2007 11:14:02 +0000

2. should be linked to 1. Australians should not have to pay for Chinese pollution.

By: Mark Hill

Mark Hill — Fri, 15 Jun 2007 08:55:58 +0000

I like where this is heading, for a potential policy for the LDP.

1. Liberalise to remove Government imposed pollution and AGW.

2. Impose a “negative global warming tax” linked to a futures market much like the unpopular policy analysis market.

Brilliant.

By: pommygranate

pommygranate — Fri, 15 Jun 2007 00:42:10 +0000

This idea can be further improved upon by adding a futures market tied to the troposphere temperature. This would then allow energy companies to forward plan and to hedge tax considerations related to energy construction costs. Author, Ross McKitrick, is fielding questions here

By: Weblog 2 Globe warming « Youngin

Weblog 2 Globe warming « Youngin — Thu, 14 Jun 2007 17:00:11 +0000

[...] the movie and displaying the seriousness of it. While on the other hand Thoughts on Freedom’s Global warming predictions is making light of the situation making bets on how much the temperature is going to rise. “David [...]

By: pommygranate

pommygranate — Thu, 14 Jun 2007 08:12:45 +0000

Tim

I’m sure they won’t. But it is only the principle that would need to be detailed in a policy document not the exact specifics.

I think it’s a very smart idea and one that would generate tons of positive publicity.

By: Tim R

Tim R — Thu, 14 Jun 2007 08:00:13 +0000

It’s a good idea to have a results based tax. This is something missing from most regulatory schemes. The efficacy of the regulations themsleves are never a major focus.

But won’t you be almost be back to square one when it comes to determining tax amounts/percentages per unit of troposphere temperature increase/decrease? I doubt Libertarians and greenies or right and left are going to agree on the amount of tax required.

Also, does anyone know off the top of their heads what global air circulation is like at tropospheric levels? I’ll look it up.

By: John Humphreys

John Humphreys — Thu, 14 Jun 2007 06:01:23 +0000

You beat me to it pommy. I saw this idea this morning and I like it.
It doesn’t just call the alarmists bluff… it calls everybody’s bluff by also tying skeptics to supporting a tax if the tropical troposphere temps do increase. The only reason to oppose this idea is if you think your own predictions are wrong and you are supporting your policy for other reasons.

By: pommygranate

pommygranate — Thu, 14 Jun 2007 01:44:33 +0000

More details on my blog. The more i think about this, the better the idea becomes. It also gets around the issue of what if the earth warms but not down to CO2 (e.g. due to solar activity). By measuring changes in the tropical troposphere temperature you eliminate effects from solar activity and other natural effects; only sustained greenhouse warming will do it. Hence the tax will be specifically on global warming caused by greenhouse gases. Call the alarmists bluff. LDP policy?

By: pommygranate

pommygranate — Thu, 14 Jun 2007 01:02:31 +0000

Here's an idea that is radical, innovative, green, sceptical and libertarian. Propose a carbon tax linked to changes in the tropical troposphere temperatures - the fingerprint of the CO2 contribution to warming. Earth warms, carbon tax goes up; earth cools and it reduces. Calls everyone's bluff. Idea found on the Climate Audit blog.