I don't know any example where a legislation (especially which levied tax) was rolled back because the argument no longer held true. And hence my skepticism of

I don't know any example where a legislation (especially which levied tax) was rolled back because the argument no longer held true. And hence my skepticism of "carbon taxes". Additionally, I do not see anyone arguing a moderate position on legislation, which logically follows, considering the data may be wrong. Action based on potentially incorrect data is as big a problem as much as the null hypothesis you define. I am hard pressed to see a legislation that talks about reducing materialistic consumption, or living frugal, but we are very interested in increasing taxes. No?