Be all that as it may, this THREAT, and it is sold as a threat, covered in the news as a threat, whispered and shouted about as a threat, is a very real, tangible, important issue for many people. The threat of a global catastrophe is more than enough to drive people farther to the Left, to allow them to overlook policy positions they may have hated had they not become one issue voters.
Global Warming believers, in other words, just might be Trump supporters, but for this one issue. Some of them, at any rate.
As I keep saying, my understanding of the hypothesis is that the upper Troposphere has to warm rapidly, roughly 3x overall warming of the Earth, in order for CO2 to create added warming down below. CO2, to be clear, is absolutely necessary for life on Earth. It is categorically one of the elements which prevents the Earth from turning into a ball of ice in endless space.
But the importance of CO2 is inversely proportional to its concentration. As it goes from nothing to something, it is HUGELY important. As it goes from a lot, to a REALLY lot? Not so much. Its’ effect is an inverse logarithm. This is the math, or so I read.
It seems to me it would be prudent, and intelligent for Trump to convene some alternative to the IPCC, which is run by the very people who both work for an aspiring world government, and who also want to bring it about.
Such a committee, or panel, or working group, could focus on this one issue. No more are needed, although ice maximums and minimums are pretty indicative too.
They could post a graph of the temperature data in the relevant altitudes. They could explain the hypothesis clearly, which is something the warmings NEVER do. They could point out water vapor is the main greenhouse gas. They could mention the inverse logarithm, particularly since the warmists keep implying there is some “runaway” point, which is ridiculous.
They could point out the Earth has been covered with ice, and been devoid of ice, and that we are presently still in an Ice Age, since for most of its history, the Earth did not have polar ice.
There is whole lot of basic data, rudimentary data, which is not shared with the public. This fact alone should alert anyone with what I would describe as a healthy level of skepticism to the fundamental corruption of the whole project.
What I have in mind, put slightly differently, is a more structured, more carefully constructed, ALTERNATIVE to the IPCC, which is staffed by people whose jobs do not depend entirely on the existence of anthropogenic global warming.
The fossil fuel industry will of course support this initiative entirely, but it would be politically prudent, if possible, not to take any money from them. I would like this thing to subsist entirely on taxpayer money. We are already funding the warmists. We might as well fund their more honest counter parts.