Say, Logtroll, why is it you state "You can't fix a problem until you know what the problem is."

No one has yet shown that anthropogenically added CO2 to atmosphere is a problem.

NASA has: https://climate.nasa.gov

Former Nasa researcher and father of climate change awareness says melting of ice sheets could cause ‘several meters’ rise in a century, swamping coastal cities

Without a sharp reduction in greenhouse gas emissions, the global sea level is likely to increase “several meters over a timescale of 50 to 150 years”, the paper states, warning that the Earth’s oceans were six to nine meters higher during the Eemian period – an interglacial phase about 120,000 years ago that was less than 1C warmer than it is today.

Global warming of 2C above pre-industrial times – the world is already halfway to this mark – would be “dangerous” and risk submerging cities, the paper said. A separate study, released in February, warned that New York, London, Rio de Janeiro and Shanghai will be among the cities at risk from flooding by 2100.

...from James Hanson's research paper in Atmospheric Chemistry and Physics

It is neither a hypothesis or theory. It is an observational result, one that presently can be explained only by the greenhouse theory. I attach the chart published by my organization, Home - Berkeley Earth. Our published, peer-reviewed papers are available on our web site.

This plot shows a measurement of global warming that directly addressed all of the objections raised by the skeptics (urban heat island, data selection bias, poor station sites, data adjustment bias, manipulated global climate models). It shows that the only theory (and by theory I include only those that make predictions) that matches the data is the theory that the temperature change is driven by greenhouse gas emissions. Volcanic eruptions contribute only short-term effects (the dips). Changes in solar activity account for less than 5% of the observed change.

Global warming is observed, and the only theory that accounts for it is the greenhouse theory.

Yep, he has described in detail how he staged meetings with politicians when his case was weak, to get the desired outcome. A total fraud, funded with tax money.