Comments for Carlin Economics and Science

Comment on US Supports Costly Loss and Damage Mechanism at UN Doha Climate Meeting by California Cities Tie Citizens to United Nations Agenda 21—Jobs Will be Lost

California Cities Tie Citizens to United Nations Agenda 21—Jobs Will be Lost — Tue, 02 Apr 2013 03:06:45 +0000

[...] the U.N. activists instituted at Qatar a climate “Loss and Damage Mechanism.” This makes the developed nations of the world, including the United States, liable for [...]

Comment on About by James Stafford

James Stafford — Wed, 13 Mar 2013 15:31:42 +0000

New Anthony Watts Interview Just Published: Climate Change without Catastrophe (News Tip)

Dear Editor,

I just wanted to send you a quick mail to let you know that we have just conducted a very interesting interview with the well known figure in the climate debate Anthony Watts.
It’s a very interesting chat and whether you agree or disagree with his comments I thought you and your readers would find some value in taking a look

A few of the topics we discussed are:

• The difference between “global warming” and “climate change”
• Why CO2 is partially responsible but oversold
• Why recent major weather events cannot be linked to CO2
• Why we should be more worried about another ice age
• Why carbon taxes won’t have any effect on the whims of Mother Nature
• How the climate debate has taken on religious proportions
• Why the Keystone protests are all for show
• Why Mother Nature will be the final arbiter of truth
• What we should and shouldn’t be doing to address global warming
• Why “climate change” has become a favorite bogeyman
• Why scientifically we’ve only scratched the surface of climate change

You can read the full interview at: http://oilprice.com/Interviews/Climate-Change-without-Catastrophe-Interview-with-Anthony-Watts.html

I hope you find the interview interesting.

Best regards,

James Stafford

Comment on The Need for Using Geoengineering to Avoid a New Ice Age Starting in the Next Few Millennia by Brian H

Brian H — Fri, 08 Mar 2013 19:00:47 +0000

Given the high and accelerating pace of technological and scientific capacity (notwithstanding the recent contrascientific political CAGW putsch attempt), prescribing actions for humanity 500 to 2500 years in the future is like a babbling infant giving advice on running and adjusting complex machinery. It’s hubristic, foolish, and totally irrelevant.

The only value of such articles as this is to deflect patently counter-productive waste of resources and human effort (economics) chasing self-destructive goals.

Comment on The Need for Using Geoengineering to Avoid a New Ice Age Starting in the Next Few Millennia by Neil Craig

Neil Craig — Tue, 26 Feb 2013 19:07:06 +0000

If we build a spacegoing civilisation, which we are well capable of doing over the next few decades with little more than current technology, then it will be possible to cheaply put square miles of tinfoil in orbit acting either as sunscreens or mirrors depending on what is required.

This will more than offset any solar changes,negative or positive.

Comment on The Need for Using Geoengineering to Avoid a New Ice Age Starting in the Next Few Millennia by Alec Rawls

Alec Rawls — Mon, 25 Feb 2013 05:58:39 +0000

I have been suggesting for several years that, as a precaution, we should be dotting the great white north with coal generation plants designed, not to produce electricity, but to maximize soot production. They could provide local electricity as useful, and burn clean until such time as they might be needed. But if a big lurch in the cold direction comes, we had better have this geo-engineering capacity already in place.

Comment on The Need for Using Geoengineering to Avoid a New Ice Age Starting in the Next Few Millennia by Weekly Climate and Energy News Roundup | Watts Up With That?

Weekly Climate and Energy News Roundup | Watts Up With That? — Mon, 25 Feb 2013 03:36:49 +0000

[...] http://www.carlineconomics.com/archives/1547 [...]

Comment on Comments on Proposed EPA Endangerment Technical Support Document by Bryan Kurtti

Bryan Kurtti — Mon, 07 Jan 2013 06:04:46 +0000

I’ve read this kind of information, but it is very complete and comprehensive, so that I can better understand it. To be honest I never have a dilemma that is difficult to discover the solution.Thank you for this information.

Comment on My Presentation on Climate Change Causation and Geoengineering at Moscow Conference on November 8 by Sona Hew

Sona Hew — Mon, 03 Dec 2012 05:32:45 +0000

We should focus more on climate change since we would be exposed to more typhoons, hurricanes and even famine.`

Comment on About by Annie Walker

Annie Walker — Sat, 01 Dec 2012 16:30:41 +0000

A very interesting post. This is the first time that I have read about the warming effect of direct heat – you are saying that there would still be a warming effect even if all our heat came from hydro electric, wind or nuclear sources. In addition, presumably, to the minute amount added from CO2 itself, the warming effect of CO2 being strongly logarithmic, and the other warming gasses, water vapour, methane and so on.

Thank you for signing the Open Climate Letter and doing all that you can to lead us all into enlightenment. We look back on previous ages and laugh at their stupidities, but nothing has changed sadly.

Comment on About by OPEN CLIMATE LETTER TO UN SECRETARY GENERAL: Current scientific knowledge does not substantiate Ban Ki-Moon assertions on weather and climate, say 125 scientists. | FP Comment | Financial Post

Thu, 29 Nov 2012 23:38:35 +0000

[...] Alan Carlin, B.S. (California Institute of Technology), PhD (economics, Massachusetts Institute of Technology), retired senior analyst and manager, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC, former Chairman of the Angeles Chapter of the Sierra Club (recipient of the Chapter’s Weldon Heald award for conservation work), U.S.A. [...]