I shall say this only once, directed at all of you.
AGW is politics, nothing else. That is why the IPCC reports are compiled in deliberation between politicians and their employed civil servants. Scientists are not welcome.
In history there are numerous examples of rulers wishing for a way to tax the air people breath in. They found no legal way to put a tax on something nature provided without human assistance.
Another thing history shows is that it's very much, almost entirely about energy. When climate was warm, humans did not need to use as much energy to gather food and did not have to gather as much fuel to heat houses. They had time and energy for other activities. Civilizations flourished.
The taming of draught animals and slavery, division of labour, further advanced technology and philosophy until coal, petroleum and other modern energy sources made slavery superfluous and a freedom for all became a possibility. Civilisation may reach new heights.
In 1896 a Swedish scientist, Svante Arrhenius deemed CO2 a greenhouse gas. He was also a founder and board member of the Swedish Eugenics society that later became the first official state run eugenics institution anywhere in the world.
One of Arrhenius' students was Bert Bolin who, together with his close friend Olof Palme (Swedish socialist PM) was instrumental in forming the IPCC after the Stockholm meeting 1972. Bolin became the first chairman of the IPCC.
Around 1970 the EPA scrutinized av variety of gases and air borne matter. Many of them were classified pollutants. But not CO2, which was deemed an inert gas.
In the 1970's there were alarms about a new ice age. But that did not produce incentive for people to save energy.
In 1989 the Norwegian socialist PM, Gro Harlem Brundtland, for the UNFCCC (the mother of IPCC) presented the report Our Common Future, where the dangers of CO2 were first presented to the public.
The Rio summit in 1992 became the official start for AGW. It was politics naming CO2 the culprit before there was a registered crime. Vast amounts of money was funneled into "climate research" looking for the anthropogenic signature to global warming.
Computer modelling was widely used. But none, not a single one of the models have been able to come up with the correct climate development even from known (registered historical) data. This indicates the models are useless to predict future climate.
The hunt for "climate change evidence" usurped more and more of research money. Practically no one is today able to enter the academic world with the aim of questioning AGW. Such a person will lack funding and will not be peer reviewed and not published. Many scholars have witnessed to this "streamlining" of research.
Politicians who do not lock in step will not be promoted by their party.
The easiest person to fool is an academic from another discipline. Just hint that they, with their high education are superior to common people, if they agree with what is proposed. If they don't they are labeled heretics. Deniers, as the current term is, alluding to denial of the Holocaust and denial of facts in general. This is dirty arguing and Scott Pruitt addressed it the other day.http://www.politico.com/story/2017/07/12/pruitt-climate-hypocrisy-merkel-europe-240479
And I will not debate any further under the topic that calls rational skeptics deniers.
The other group of people necessary to "win" the climate hoax is the lazy uninterested majority. Such majorities always takes the easy path of relying on authority. The UN is as good an authority as any, perhaps even more prestigious than most. When you accept to side with the UN and the lazy majority you effectively resign from reason.
With AGW those who want to control us found a way to tax what we all breath out, because it's a "pollutant". They all talk about Global Governance, a "one world order" and I can almost hear them say one glorious leader. The head of UNFCC, Christiana Figueres has stated that the Climate Change meme is not about the climate, it's about the eradication of capitalism.
Closing with a couple of recent links.http://dailycaller.com/2017/07/05/exclus...urce=site-sharehttp://www.environmentalprogress.org/big-news/2017/6/21/are-we-headed-for-a-solar-waste-crisishttps://www.nationaleconomicseditorial.c...-waste-nuclear/https://townhall.com/columnists/dennisav...manity-n2335975
Over and out!