The Utopian vision, Arcadia, is associated with bountiful natural splendor, harmony, and is often inhabited by shepherds. The concept also figures in Renaissance mythology.

An Arcadian Fantasy--Earthy Day

From, Conclusions: Robert Carter, "Knock, Knock: Where is the Evidence for Dangerous Human-Caused Global Warming?" ECONOMIC ANALYSIS & POLICY, VOL. 38 NO. 2, SEPTEMBER 2008.

"To focus on the chimera of human-caused greenhouse warming while ignoring the real threats posed by the natural variability of the climate system itself is self-delusion on a grand scale.

• That human-caused climate change will prove dangerous is under strong dispute amongst equally well qualified scientific groups. The null hypothesis, which is yet to be contradicted, is that observed changes in climate or climate-related phenomena are natural unless and until it can be shown otherwise. The science of climate change is far from settled. Meanwhile, there is no compelling evidence that human-caused climate change poses a strong future danger.

• No measurable environmental benefits have resulted from actions taken under the Kyoto Protocol, nor can they be predicted to result from carbon dioxide emission restrictions more generally. On the other hand, the social and economic disbenefits of governments deploying such instruments are now reported daily in the media. The available scientific data, and proved relationships, do not justify the belief that carbon dioxide emission controls can be used as a means of ‘managing’ or ‘stopping’ future climate change.

• Bowen (2005) has well written:
‘Science is based upon empiricism – the objective observation of natural phenomena, and the attempt to encompass them in classifications, models and theories of everexpanding scope. This enormously important principle of the Enlightenment still needs affirming. The principle is under threat, from those of every religious and political persuasion and from those of none, who seek to impose their world view upon scientific enquiry. Science is not more important than morality. But without empiricism, there can be no science’.

The projections (which are not predictions) of computer modellers that are now almost the sole basis for IPCC climate alarmism must be assessed against the best available empirical evidence.

• Climate variation has always occurred and always will. Citizens are right to be concerned about the possibly damaging effects of both the warmings and coolings which lie ahead. As with most potential natural disasters, however, the appropriate action is to have in place reactive response plans to manage the change when it occurs. Dangerous climate extremes will not be prevented by reducing human carbon dioxide emissions, but – as they occur – should be adapted to using similar response strategies to those applied to other dangerous natural events such as earthquakes, volcanic eruptions, tsunami and sea-level change.

• Attempting to ‘stop climate change’, or, in the present state of our knowledge and technology, even to modify it, is an arcadian fantasy. The Australian government should defer its Emissions Trading Scheme bill until the completion of a thorough and independent judicial review into alleged humancaused global warming – as assessed against the reality of dangerous natural climate change.

• Lastly, because we are far from understanding all the climatic feedback loops concerned, cutting carbon dioxide emissions is as likely to ‘harm’ as to ‘help’ future climate as judged against a human viewpoint.

Therefore, application of the principles of ‘do no harm’ and ‘precaution’ implies that the correct climate policy is one of monitoring climate change as it happens, adapting to any deleterious trends that emerge, and compensating those who are disadvantaged through no fault of their own."