Nuance is needed. Being told by you (who?) that the matter ‘is settled’ is not a persuasive approach. If people like MIT professor emeritus Richard Lindzen, Fr

Nuance is needed. Being told by you (who?) that the matter ‘is settled’ is not a persuasive approach. If people like MIT professor emeritus Richard Lindzen, Freeman Dyson of the Institute of Advanced Studies at Princeton, and Stanford University professor emeritus Elliott D. Bloom and many more including other atmospheric physicists believe there are arguments to be had on a complex subject then I tend to think they have a point. The above joined 497 other distinguished scientists in signing the European Climate Declaration and are listed in a link here. https://clintel.nl/prominent-scientists-warn-un-secretary-general-guterres/ https://clintel.nl/prominent-scientists-warn-un-secretary-ge... In summary their position is: 1. There is no climate emergency: 2. Natural as well as anthropogenic factors cause warming: 3. Warming is far slower than predicted: 4. Climate policy relies on inadequate models: 5. CO2 is plant food, the basis of all life on Earth (< 150ppm plants do not survive): 6. Global warming has not increased natural disasters: 7. Policy must respect scientific and economic realities: 8. An honest climate science debate is warranted