Tim Worstall is definitely in something of a climate change groove at the moment. In his Forbes blog, he's writing about a new paper in Nature that suggests that climate change deserves less of our attention than previously thought (or at least that's Tim's interpretation).
We are being warned that it is not just climate change that might lead to catastrophe: population growth could do this as well. Fair enough, a reasonable enough assumption.
What does this mean for our discussions of climate change? Well, it means that Stern is wrong in his discount rate, that the currently assumed social cost of carbon emissions is too high, that we should almost certainly be doing less about climate change than is currently planned and finally, that we should, again almost certainly, aim for more economic growth even at the expense of carbon emissions and climate change than is currently thought optimal.
Feels like a Eureka moment to me. Read the whole thing.