The liberal logic goes like this:
Emission of carbon dioxide causes greenhouse effect.
The said effect must manifest itself as global warming.
Thus to prevent global warming we must decrease carbon dioxide emissions.
But scientists detect no global warming at all, so lets use the term "climate change".
The "climate change" is scary enough to our keep our liberal voters in fear of god.
Since there is no "global warming", lets use "climate change".
But greenhouse effect allegedly produced by CO2 should result in "global warming", not merely in "climate change", right? Warming is warming, change is change.
How do you link CO2 to "climate change" if the link is missing in the chain
CO2 -> greenhouse effect -> global warming -> climate change?
Oh, never mind. Carbon dioxide was already vilified, lets now make our classical trick of bait and switch.
Bookmarks