I liked the way he refers to them as “global warming alarmists.”
They are, indeed, alarmists, so that’s accurate, and forcing the conversation back to “global warming” from their preferred “climate change” or, more recently, “climate disruption” pins them down in two ways. First, everyone knows that they really mean global warming anyway so it keeps them honest, and second, the earth isn’t cooperating with them by actually warming, at least to anywhere near the degree their models claim.
Are you sick of your electric bills going up every year just to thwart the dreaded global warming that isn’t even happening?....would seem like a decent campaign pitch to me.
And if we get a GOP president who will come out foursquare against spending billions of dollars on this scam, and will call it out for the scam it really is, that might finally put an end to it. But if that doesn’t do it, redirecting a few billion dollars of grant money to skeptics should cut the number of alarmists by about 99%. Most will switch sides and the rest will starve without their taxpayer-funded banquets.
He’s framing the debate. That’s exactly what you’d expect from a national debating champion.