SOMETHING LIKE THIS article at Carbon Sense…
“Moreover, a bit of warmth would vastly increase the land suitable for growing food and fibres. On the other hand, a slight cooling would take much of the farmlands of Canada, Northern Eurasia and New Zealand out of production, and parts of Tasmania and Victoria may have to convert from producing wheat and dairy products to farming caribou or reindeer.
“Warm eras also provide more rainfall because of the additional evaporation from oceans, lakes, snow and ice.
“When warmth and moisture are combined with more carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, the beneficial effects on plant life are multiplied. A doubling of the CO2 content of the air would have insignificant effect on global warming but would have marvellous effects on plant (and then animal) life:
Growth rate of herbaceous plants would increase 30%
Growth rate of forest plants would increase 50%
All plants would be more tolerant of drought and heat
Food production would need less land and less artificial fertiliser
“All of this magic can be achieved by allowing man’s activities to recycle more CO2 and water to the atmosphere. Why then are politicians taxing carbon and encouraging people to waste money on foolish schemes such as trying to bury valuable carbon dioxide in artificial and expensive carbon cemeteries?
…And I can’t help but conclude, as did Steven Milloy at Junk Science (to whom a tip o’ the tam o’ shanter), that the whole CAGW scheme is… “anti-life and against the interests of mankind.”