Richard Lindzen

And that's when people started saying, well, now we better find CO2.

It's increased because of industrialization and so on.

And that began the demonization of CO2.

Oh yeah, and this was a particular case.

The energy sector is trillions of dollars.

Anything you can do to overturn it, change it, replace fossil fuels, it's big bucks.

And one of the odd things, I think, in politics, I don't see it studied much, Congress can actually give away trillions of dollars.

If you look at the McKinsey report on eliminating CO2 net zero, they're saying it'll cost hundreds of trillions of dollars.

Well, if you're giving out that much, you don't need that much of your politician.

All you need is millions for your campaigning.

And all you're asking are the recipients of people who are getting the money that you are giving them, a half percent, a quarter percent, you're golden.

So that's much better than giving out $100,000 and having all of it back.

Now, that's a very interesting phenomenon.

I was looking at it.

On the one hand, you're told the science is settled, right?

Thousands of the world's leading climate scientists all agree, which often makes you wonder.

I mean, you went to college.

How many climate scientists did you know?

But on the other hand, if you read the IPCC reports, they're pointing out, for instance, that water vapor and clouds are much bigger than CO2, and we don't understand them at all.

So we have the biggest phenomena.