The Copenhagen Consensus, Climate and Money

The Copenhagen Consensus project gathered 8 leading economists together and had them rank the world's problems in order of most bang for the buck:

Now this makes sense. Why are so many Liberals more concerned about phantom climate change than real humans suffering right now? It is not just wackos who are so confused either. National Geographic is on the crusade too. You'd think that with all their pictures of true human suffering they would be more prudent. Anyway, they too have the science all wrong. Here is what Patrick Michaels at Cato has to say about their Bangladesh story:

It begins with a picture of a flooded rice field in Bangladesh, with the comment that "as global temperatures and sea level climbs [rice farming] becomes an ever more precarious means of support." In 2001, Cecile Cabanes calculated sea-level rise for the last half-century around the world. In Bangladesh, there was a net fall in the 1990s. In the last 50 years, it has risen there an infinitesimal seven-tenths of an inch, far too little for anyone to notice, in Bangladesh or anywhere else.

Now, there are people in Bangladesh suffering from malnutrition, malaria, etc. How can we spend billions on dubious climate protocols when we could spend millions on food and drug programs for millions of people facing clear and present dangers.

I know that many criticize the Copenhagen Project as biased since Bjorn Lomborg is the director. But that is really just ad hominem. Instead, they should focus on the work itself. They will not do this since their own claims are dubious. How do I know that the claims from the Left are dubious? Consider this.