Twitter / Andy Revkin [For atmospheric CO2, should we adopt a zero-tolerance policy?]

@omnologos I have woken up to brutish, divisive tone. Just doesn't much undercut body of science pointing to rising risk with rising CO2. [OK, so are we safest with atmospheric CO2 at zero parts per million? If not, what CO2 level is "safest"?]

Sherwood 2008: Where you can find a hot spot at zero degrees « JoNova

The Big-Scare-Campaign needed an answer to the missing hot-spot question. They needed to find the “hot spot”, or failing that, at the very least provide a “hot spot” type graph that would answer the critics; something that passed for a scientific answer that might fool journalists and bloggers. The failure to find the projected hot spot is so damning, and so obviously not what the models predicted, that there is a veritable industry of people working hard to find a reason why the weather balloon results must be wrong. Steven Sherwood creatively even resorted to throwing out the thermometer readings entirely and using wind shear instead. (If only we’d known! All those years and we didn’t need the thermometers?)

Why I Won’t Back Down on [the Climate Change swindle] - By John Kerry | Foreign Policy

A carbon-pricing plan will decrease our dependence on foreign oil, create American jobs, lower energy bills, and protect our environment.  [note that the old "protect our grandchildren from CO2-induced hellfire" argument is minimized here] This will be the measure of a real bill, and I'm prepared to fight to get this done, following the strategy Winston Churchill laid out at the outbreak of World War II: "Never give in, never give in -- never, never, never, never."