= new reply since forum marked as read
I never thought for a minute, that the fossil fuel industry couldn't or didn't know better, they have their own scientists and carbon dioxide was first considered to be a greenhouse gas in the 19th century.
The history of the scientific discovery of climate change began in the early 19th century when ice ages and other natural changes in paleoclimate were first suspected and the natural greenhouse effect first identified. In the late 19th century, scientists first argued that human emissions of greenhouse gases could change the climate. Many other theories of climate change were advanced, involving forces from volcanism to solar variation. In the 1960s, the warming effect of carbon dioxide gas became increasingly convincing, although some scientists also pointed out that human activities, in the form of atmospheric aerosols (e.g., "pollution"
, could have cooling effects as well. During the 1970s, scientific opinion increasingly favored the warming viewpoint. By the 1990s, as a result of improving fidelity of computer models and observational work confirming the Milankovitch theory of the ice ages, a consensus position formed: greenhouse gases were deeply involved in most climate changes, and human emissions were bringing serious global warming.
Since the 1990s, scientific research on climate change has included multiple disciplines and has expanded, significantly increasing our understanding of causal relations, links with historic data and ability to model climate change numerically. The most recent work has been summarized in the Assessment Reports by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Climate change is a significant and lasting change in the statistical distribution of weather patterns over periods ranging from decades to millions of years. It may be a change in average weather conditions, or in the distribution of weather around the average conditions (i.e., more or fewer extreme weather events). Climate change is caused by factors that include oceanic processes (such as oceanic circulation), biotic processes, variations in solar radiation received by Earth, plate tectonics and volcanic eruptions, and human-induced alterations of the natural world; these latter effects are currently causing global warming, and "climate change" is often used to describe human-specific impacts.
(snip)
In 1896 Svante Arrhenius calculated the effect of a doubling atmospheric carbon dioxide to be an increase in surface temperatures of 5-6 degrees Celsius.
A Swedish scientist, Svante Arrhenius, used Langley's observations of increased infrared absorption where Moon rays pass through the atmosphere at a low angle, encountering more carbon dioxide (CO2), to estimate an atmospheric cooling effect from a future decrease of CO2. He realized that the cooler atmosphere would hold less water vapor (another greenhouse gas) and calculated the additional cooling effect. He also realized the cooling would increase snow and ice cover at high latitudes, making the planet reflect more sunlight and thus further cool down, as James Croll had hypothesized. Overall Arrhenius calculated that cutting CO2 in half would suffice to produce an ice age. He further calculated that a doubling of atmospheric CO2 would give a total warming of 5-6 degrees Celsius.
Further, Arrhenius colleague Professor Arvid Högbom, who was quoted in length in Arrhenius 1896 study On the Influence of Carbonic Acid in the Air upon the Temperature of the Earth[14] had been attempting to quantify natural sources of emissions of CO2 for purposes of understanding the global carbon cycle. Högbom found that estimated carbon production from industrial sources in the 1890s (mainly coal burning) was comparable with the natural sources.[15] Arrhenius saw that this human emission of carbon would eventually lead to warming. However, because of the relatively low rate of CO2 production in 1896, Arrhenius thought the warming would take thousands of years, and he expected it would be beneficial to humanity.[15][16]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_climate_change_science
OBAMA'S GONNA TAKE MY GUNZZZZ 
corporate welfare 
There's a thought for a 'world government' you never see floated. Instead of letting our richest executives pick our politicians for us (and then have them paraded in front of us by the media, as they remove whomever they'd like at will, at least until this year), or relying on 'world leaders' (is the world in a wonderful state now? Oh, it isn't? Then I guess we've seen the success rate of their 'leadership' so far, neh?), why not take a citizen's list from every nation on earth, divide them into equal numbers of regions, and send in delegates from the citizenry. Tens of thousands of them, to one place, to discuss a 'world government'.
I might be able to get behind the idea then. 
Seemed a good enough place to toss out another one of my never-gunna-happen scenarios, at least. Of course we're sick of it, Playinghardball. It's just we have no ability to change it.
