How to Understand Climate Debate

Two basic issues dominate the climate debate:

1. For CO2 emitters to prove that CO2 has no significant effect.
2. For CO2 alarmists to prove that CO2 has significant effect.

We may compare with a legal process:

1. For the accused to prove innocence.
2. For the prosecutor to prove that the accused is guilty.

We understand that 2. is a necessary requirement for the prosecutor to win the process. If 2. is missing, the issue 1. does not come up.

The situation is the same in climate politics: If 2. is missing, then 1. does not come up. And the fact is that 2. is missing. There is no scientific evidence that CO2 has a significant effect.

But clever CO2 alarmists are turning the debate around to 1. instead of 2. asking CO2 emitters to prove that CO2 has no significant effect. Once one understands this trick also the climate debate becomes understandable and more managable.