Climate Change Reconsidered II (CCR-II) is an independent, comprehensive, and authoritative report on the current state of climate science. It is produced by the Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change (NIPCC), an international network of climate scientists sponsored by three nonprofit organizations: the Science and Environmental Policy Project, Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change, and The Heartland Institute.
NIPCC’s basic conclusion: “NIPCC’s conclusion, drawn from its extensive review of the scientific evidence, is that the greenhouse gas-induced global climate signal is so small as to be embedded within the background variability of the natural climate system and is not dangerous.”
CCR-II consists of three parts: a Summary for Policy Makers (22 pages) and CCR-II Physical Science (Ca. 1,018 pages, 20Mb) are available for free download. The third part, titled Impacts, Adaptation, and Vulnerabilities, is expected to be released in March, 2014.
Approximately 40 scientists are participating as authors, contributors, or reviewers. Lead authors are Dr. Craig D. Idso, a geologist and founder and current chairman of the Center for the Study of Carbon Dioxide and Global Change; Dr. Robert M. Carter, a marine geologist and environmental scientist and formerly professor and head of the School of Earth Sciences at James Cook University (Australia); and Dr. S. Fred Singer, an atmospheric physicist formerly a professor at the University of Virginia and currently director of the Science and Environmental Policy Project.
CCR-II cites more than 1,000 peer-reviewed scientific papers to show that the IPCC has ignored or misinterpreted much of the research that challenges the need for carbon dioxide controls. In other words, the NIPCC report demonstrates that the science being relied upon by governments to create multi-billion dollar policies is almost certainly wrong.
What follows are excerpts of the key findings from the Executive Summary (you can read a more extensive list of findings from the executive summary here, about five pages).
• Atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO2) is a mild greenhouse gas that exerts a diminishing warming effect as its concentration increases.
• Doubling the concentration of atmospheric CO2 from its pre-industrial level, in the absence of other forcings and feedbacks, would likely cause a warming of ~0.3 to 1.1°C, almost 50% of which must already have occurred.
• A few tenths of a degree of additional warming, should it occur, would not represent a climate crisis.
• Model outputs published in successive IPCC reports since 1990 project a doubling of CO2 could cause warming of up to 6°C by 2100. Instead, global warming ceased around the end of the twentieth century and was followed (since 1997) by 16 years of stable temperature.
• Over recent geological time, Earth’s temperature has fluctuated naturally between about +4°C and -6°C with respect to twentieth century temperature. A warming of 2°C above today, should it occur, falls within the bounds of natural variability.
• Though a future warming of 2°C would cause geographically varied ecological responses, no evidence exists that those changes would be net harmful to the global environment or to human well-being.
• At the current level of ~400 ppm we still live in a CO2-starved world. Atmospheric levels 15 times greater existed during the Cambrian Period (about 550 million years ago) without known adverse effects.
• The overall warming since about 1860 corresponds to a recovery from the Little Ice Age modulated by natural multidecadal cycles driven by ocean-atmosphere oscillations, or by solar variations at the de Vries (~208 year) and Gleissberg (~80 year) and shorter periodicities.
• Earth has not warmed significantly for the past 16 years despite an 8% increase in atmospheric CO2, which represents 34% of all extra CO2 added to the atmosphere since the start of the industrial revolution.
• CO2 is a vital nutrient used by plants in photosynthesis. Increasing CO2 in the atmosphere “greens” the planet and helps feed the growing human population.
• No close correlation exists between temperature variation over the past 150 years and human-related CO2 emissions. The parallelism of temperature and CO2 increase between about 1980 and 2000 AD could be due to chance and does not necessarily indicate causation.
• The causes of historic global warming remain uncertain, but significant correlations exist between climate patterning and multidecadal variation and solar activity over the past few hundred years.
• Forward projections of solar cyclicity imply the next few decades may be marked by global cooling rather than warming, despite continuing CO2 emissions.
To review the links:
wryheat 
Climate change can say a comet hit is real but can’t say climate change is as real as a comet hit. Saying something could happen is not a crisis but it would have been nice if news editors had repeated the fact that it was a 28 year old “maybe” consensus.
I believe this report is cooked up by Koch funded denier “Stink Tank”, Heartland. What do you expect from that.
The 97% consensus of climate scientists is also non-governmental, BTW.
But, nice try at the ol’ smear, Heartland. That is your genius. In Freudian terms it is the anal-compulsive desire to “smear” those that you feel are threatening.
I see we have another fact-free comment from a member of the Church of Global Warming, using ad hominem attacks rather than refuting the argument with real empirical data. Normally I would delete such a comment. However I will take the opportunity for a self-serving commercial message. I HAVE WRITTEN OVER 700 POSTS, NONE OF WHICH WERE FUNDED BY THE KOCH BROTHERS, BIG OIL, OR BIG COAL OR ANY OTHER ORGANIZATION. IF MEMBERS OF THOSE ORGANIZATIONS LIKE WHAT I WRITE, PLEASE CLICK ON THE DONATE BUTTON AND MAKE A CONTRIBUTION. Make jfreed27’s allegations come true.
I salute your tenacity in the face of imbecility