Heartland Institute Comments on 2013 Draft National Climate Assessment
The National Climate Assessment and Development Advisory Committee's (NCADAC) 2013 Draft National Climate Assessment tackles many important climate-related questions but consistently reaches overly pessimistic conclusions. The Draft National Climate Assessment presents many asserted climatic change impacts - some real, some contradicted by the weight of scientific evidence - and paints a picture of a nation and world severely and negatively affected by human-induced climate change. By contrast, the weight of scientific evidence suggests only modest recent climate change by historical standards. Importantly, the weight of scientific evidence suggests the Draft Assessment overstates asserted recent harms and overlooks the fact that recent climatic changes are creating net benefits to plants, animals, and human welfare rather than net harm.
The following Comments by Heartland Senior Fellow James M. Taylor reflect and refer to more than 400 pages of scientific evidence presented in Climate Change Reconsidered: 2011 Interim Report of the Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change (CCR 2011). Climate experts Craig D. Idso, Robert M. Carter, and S. Fred Singer served as Lead Authors of CCR 2011. Contributing scientists included Susan Crockford, Joseph D'Aleo, Indur Goklany, Sherwood Idso, Madhav Khandekar, Anthony Lupo, Willie Soon, and Mitch Taylor. CCR 2011 in turn builds upon more than 800 pages of scientific evidence presented in Climate Change Reconsidered: The 2009 Report of the Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change (CCR 2009). CCR 2009 and CCR 2011 present more than one thousand citations to peer-reviewed scientific literature. Citations to CCR reports are provided within these Comments.
The following Comments also draw upon additional data and studies. Citations to these data and studies are also provided within the Comments.