Don’t publish it. Anthropogenic climate change is real.
That is not exactly true, in terms of the high standards of science verification. This cycle of climate change, is not even finished. We have maybe gone half way through the first experiment. After it is finally completes, will need a second cycle, as a second experiment, to make sure the first is not a fluke or is being erroneous inferred and attached.
You cannot just publish a paper and assume that is enough to prove anything, even if it is thought provoking. Another, independent group needs to duplicate the results of the premise, of manmade climate change, with a new second experiment, which has not yet happened, since the first experiment is still running. This premise has never happened in the history of the earth. One cycle is not fully verified, scientifically, until it is duplicated.
This slack appears to be a Lefty, ram it through the system scam, that violates the duplicate verification step of science. The rules are you cannot have the same team run the duplicate, since they are biased; control over funding. You need another team, which because this got so political; consensus of science scam, has to be composed of scientists with other theories, not in the consensus. Consensus is a political term and adds subjectivity. Consensus of science is an oxymoron. Science is about fact that is self standing and self evident to all. Consensus of opinion is which tooth paste tastes better.
Natural Climate change has plenty of data, over a billion years, that extends to dozens of complete cycles. That theory has been verified to be possible on earth, with dozens of natural tests/complete cycles, to show how the earth, all by itself, can do this under a wide range of conditions. That is the only theory that satisfies the verification rules of science. The manmade premise is being driven by politics and not by full science duplication. A biased consensus, which is the nature of consensus; subjective, is not real science; politically advantageous.
That aside, say we did finally verify man made global warming and climate change, along with a second complete cycle test. The third set of assumed premises, which can be potentially dangerous to world's populations, is what do we do about it to make the earth better?
None of the doom and gloom prediction, connected to the third set of premises, have panned out; the poles are still there and the coastline is not flooded. This year hurricane season is nothing special, compared to the doom and gloom predictions of what to do.
The theory behind the third set; what to do, is still way half baked. This is because we have not competed even one cycle, to have an idea of what to expect, such as how the earth helps and how we can help the earth with parallel efforts. Based on science, nothing should be done until there is proof the third set of premise, will work and are verified. Climate change is about science and not ram if through the system politics, right? The Political Left, who is pushing ram it through man made climate change, is prone to lying and disinformation. You cannot count on them to be honest. VP Harris is all about creating a TV Presidential persona but lacks on policy; solution logic. Fear is also one of their main tactics; man made is an existential threat to humanity. This is why we need to stick to science and hope science has not been too corrupted by politics.
We need to wait to act, but react in real time to changes, while avoiding major political overhauls until there is proof and duplicate verification that what we try to do will work. If not then scam artists will lead us to disaster. If the scam artists do act too early, maybe we can put their freedom as collateral, say mandatory jail time, if their schemes leads to worse social problems. We can even allow citizens to hunt them down for the pain they will cause. Or is maybe, it is better to wait for science to reach its final duplication conclusions.
