Curmudgeon,
AFAIK, Lord Nicholas Stern is not a Nobel Laureate.

I'm trying to figure out if Robert Murphy could even take his own arguments seriously! Damaging climate change is not an unlikely event; on the contrary it's a very high likelihood event and must be treated as such. The line between catastrophic and merely damaging is not defined. The loss of the Barrier Reef? The permanent loss of much of SE Australian agricultural capacity? Normal summers as hot as the last few years' heat waves and heat waves off the current scale? I don't believe the unsupported contention that future generations will be much wealthier than us whether we deal with climate change or not. How? Increased Coal exports?!!

Sorry, but Murphy has failed to convince. His arguments reveal a failure to grasp the seriousness and likelihood of damaging climate change. His is just one more of the chorus of voices that think the proper response to the greatest challenge of our times is to throw in the towel and not think too hard about it being our own grandkids paying the price when those costs fully accrue.