Replies

That's the perfect answer and the MSNBC headline fails to see through it.

If you read up on the differences between "warmists" and "deniers", there are relatively few, and they are important.

Both sides acknowledge that the Earth has been warming since the Little Ice Age ended.
Both sides believe adding CO2 to the atmosphere, all other things being equal, would raise temperatures.
Both sides believe human activity adds CO2 to the atmosphere.
Most same people on both sides acknowledge that satellite data for the last 18+ years has show little if any warming. And it's far below what the climate models predicted.

The differences are the key:

"Warmists" believe there are characteristics in the climate such that, a 1 degree warming from CO2 would be amplified quite a bit.
"Deniers" believe that the forcing has been overstated. It's either smaller, neutral, or possibly negative i.e. the Earth dampens the warming.
"Warmists" believe the last 18+ years are a "pause" and temperatures will begin increasing again. "Deniers" don't accept that as a given. Especially considering how wrong the warmists' prior predictions haven been.
"Warmists" believe the Earth's temperature going up even one or two degrees has to be bad. This seems to be based on an assumption that anything humans do that changes the environment just has to be bad. "Deniers" believe that some warming may help. They back that up with statistics like the number of people killed by cold, etc.
Some who straddle the camps believe that, even if there may be negative effects long term, there are certainly more important things to be address now. Providing people with safe drinking water for example. "Warmists" would rather trillions of dollars be dedicated to getting off fossil fuels. They would rather see people die.
Some realists may accept everything the "warmists" say as far as climate change, but don't accept the draconian remedies the "warmists" want to mandate. That would include the majority of people in the U.S. it seems.
"Warmists" believe the Precautionary Principle applies. That we should devote trillions of dollars toward their pet projects "just in case" they're right. Many, not just "deniers", believe that's ridiculous.

My opinion is that there are too many unknowns to divert anything from more pressing issues, like getting Americans back to work. I also believe the Global Cooling -> Global Warming -. Climate Change -> Climate Disruption people are full of shit. Not because I disagree with them, but because they lie. They have been caught too many times falsifying data and it's always in the same direction. 1998 was the warmest year. Then a Y2K bug was discovered by some Canadian scientists and suddenly 1934 was the warmest year. Then, over time, the past kept getting "adjusted" until 1998 was back in front. This is bullshit. Adjusting history is 1984, not science. Also, during the last 18+ years, those "warmists" with some shred of integrity have admitted their models were wrong and began trying to figure out why. The other 99% just became more shrill that we only had minutes, hours, maybe a year or two to act if we are going to reverse this warming that isn't happening. When people are that disingenuous, I distrust anything they say.

I reject most of your assertions.

CO2 is a LAGGING indicator, NOT a predictor of temperature.

Water vapor comprises over 93% of “greenhouse gases” and there are so many variables driving the fluctuation of water vapor in the atmosphere, that it’s impossible to model.

This makes the process for assessing the impact of CO2 on climate virtually impossible.

The first thing we must recognize is that this hoax was concocted as a political mechanism to grab power and control.

Its about Population Control, undermining Capitalism and American Industry.