David's argument does not convince me.

of course, it is sophisticated, reasonable, perhaps even correct. hard to tell, it wasn't all that clear to me (sorry, my doctorate is in another field.)

the real problem is that there is no reference in the article to the facts of actual global warming: the recent screen-saver simulations may provide a wake up call on those who remain complacent. (recently published in Nature)

so who gives a stuff about the economic parameters? it is the responsiblity of the eco-crats to align their predictions with remedies and actions, not tie us up in statistical knots while Rome heats up.

David Henderson's lifetime experience as an academic and government/OECD economist of the first rank entitles him to have his objections to the IPCC's economic work taken seriously. His complaints are precisely formulated and balanced.Surely some one at IPCC should answer his objections in same calm and reasoned way as he puts them.