Thus far almost none of the models have accurately predicted the climate change or the outcomes there of. There’s a great clip of John Kerry in 2009 saying in 5

Thus far almost none of the models have accurately predicted the climate change or the outcomes there of. There’s a great clip of John Kerry in 2009 saying in 5 years there will be no year-round ice in the ice caps. Or earlier when al gore claimed everyone on the coast would be under water (he still has several beach front properties btw). Lets assume they were arguing from a position of good faith (imo unlikely). Then it’s too late to impact the outcome, we should instead invest in mitigation tactics. None of those include going to war or launching air strikes on farmers clear cutting their land. It wouldn’t reduce or improve carbon emissions in any way. Climate change should increase crop yields by most models. Depopulation and migration is more likely to happen when you stop a 3rd world countries ability to produce food or generate electricity (from coal or oil). These policies are going to explicitly cause what their intended to stop. Further, we’re exiting an ice age, by default the earth is 2-4 degrees celsius warmer. The original argument is still potentially valid that off gases can create a poor environment. It is however unclear how and what would cause this and how to mitigate. Just reacting by handing over all production capacity to China and india (which have exceptions to much of the Paris climate accords) is not going to help - it’ll just move the pollution there (and wealth to those who invested there).