Many a world leader has stated that Climate Change is the most serious issue facing humankind. But, I ask; what would a politician know about Climate Science if they are not even scientists? It's interesting that if you doubt Global Warming Theory - you are called a "Denier" of science because there is a so-called "consensus" on this issue with climate scientists who get their paychecks from research grants to prove global warming theory is correct, and yet, "consensus" does not have anything to do with actual science, consensus is more of a democratic political term.
Global Warming Theory by the IPCC's definition was' catastrophic warming caused by mankind's CO2, which we've proved to be BS. But now they've re-branded, a typical trick in corporate marketing, putting 'lipstick on a pig' and now call it Climate Change, which of course no one with even the least bit of intelligence can challenge since the Earth's climate has been changing since it has had one, about 4.5 billion years, even those indoctrinated in literal interpretations of Earth's birth 5,000 years will not deny the climate changes. Still, this does not let the IPCC off the hook for misrepresenting science or bribing those who do the science with nice funding when they embellish the overall risks of a 1.5 degree rise in that last 150-years (+ or -.5 degrees margin of error). Names do not justify theories - science does, and since the science does not follow the theory - we have to throw it out, find a new one, that's the job of the climate scientists now - not mine.
Climate Alarmists say; "I know of no one that denies that the climate changes."
Neither do I, but that is not the issue. Of course the climate changes, change being the only constant. You see, it's mostly natural variation, humans are such a small component that it is not worth discussing or this huge wasteful funding to prove otherwise.
It's not for us so-called deniers to prove a negative, but since I have been asked to prove that mankind's CO2 is not causing cataclysm warming, I ask them to prove that; "People are condemning that the climate changes" - prove it. I do not know anyone who has ever stated that the climate does not change. So, I ask the alarmists to cite me research which has statistics that "people" or deniers as they call us, deny that the climate changes - and do not try to pretend the owning of 'semantics' of the English language by saying that the IPCC's definition of "Climate Change" equals that the climate does change.
These are two different issues completely. The IPCC climate change position has and always has been that the planet is warming with catastrophic consequences due to mankind's CO2 - in fact the climate's natural variable is hardly ever taken into consideration in their mass media press releases. Think on this.