Urgh....

I'm a proud member of the Pigovian tax family, when it comes to dealing with global warming, irregardless of possibly strong objections to them. But, what the heck? Why does stupid things like not actually using peer reviewed studies as part of the UN IPCC report, while claiming you do, makes it harder to support the thesis. Mind you that still leaves, 13,000+ studies that ARE peer-reviewed, but it's annoying.