Comments on: Christopher Monckton: Strong Voice on Climate Change http://www.joecobb.com/blog/2007/01/29/strong-voice-on-climate-change/ Judge, Libertarian Party National Judicial Committee Mon, 06 Oct 2008 18:49:42 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.2 By: Joe Cobb http://www.joecobb.com/blog/2007/01/29/strong-voice-on-climate-change/#comment-51 Joe Cobb Mon, 29 Jan 2007 17:23:58 +0000 http://www.joecobb.com/blog/2007/01/29/strong-voice-on-climate-change/#comment-51 Another strong critique of the Stern Review, published in the journal, <a href=\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"http://www.staff.livjm.ac.uk/spsbpeis/WE-STERN.pdf\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" rel=\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"nofollow\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" rel=\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\"nofollow\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\" rel=\\\\\\\"nofollow\\\\\\\" rel=\\\"nofollow\\\" rel=\"nofollow\" rel="nofollow">WORLD ECONOMICS, Vol.7, No.4 (October–December 2006), pp.165-232</a>, is authored by 15 prominent scientists and economists: They write: <blockquote> The Review shows serious weaknesses in its treatment and presentation of basic data. The Annex to Part I comments on one aspect of this failing, namely, the mishandling of basic observational data relating to climate change and the factors that bear on it. Here we present a counterpart annex of a similar kind. It deals with the Review’s faulty handling of sources which are themselves flawed. The sources in question are the emissions scenarios which form the starting point for the Third Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC). </blockquote> The article presents two papers, first on problems with the science in the Stern Review and a second critiquing problems in the economic analysis. Another strong critique of the Stern Review, published in the journal, WORLD ECONOMICS, Vol.7, No.4 (October–December 2006), pp.165-232, is authored by 15 prominent scientists and economists:

They write:

The Review shows serious weaknesses in its treatment and presentation of basic data. The Annex to Part I comments on one aspect of this failing, namely, the mishandling of basic observational data relating to climate change and the factors that bear on it. Here we present a counterpart annex of a similar kind. It deals with the Review’s faulty handling of sources which are themselves flawed. The sources in question are the emissions scenarios which form the starting point for the Third Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).

The article presents two papers, first on problems with the science in the Stern Review and a second critiquing problems in the economic analysis.

]]>