Whereas: A government-driven, media-amplified “scientific consensus”1 2 narrative claims anthropogenically-caused climate change will result in catastrophic impacts to the planet. Research shows these scenarios are unlikely, and that harmful consequences from carbon dioxide emissions have been exaggerated.3 For example:

•
Corporations’ climate policies are often guided by the Paris Agreement,4 which is heavily informed by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.5 These targets are voluntary, and the United States is expected to remove itself from the agreement’s terms due to inequitable application across national economies.6
•
The IPCC’s most extreme hypotheticals assume a return to unrestricted fossil fuel usage and heavy reliance on coal power7 — an unlikely scenario.8
•
Regarding catastrophic forecasts that are treated as the expectation: “... the media then often amplifies this message... This results in further confusion regarding probable emissions outcomes, because many climate researchers are not familiar with the details of these scenarios in the energy-modeling literature.”9
•
Apocalyptic predictions have been repeatedly proven false.10 Climate models used to predict future conditions “may be overly sensitive to carbon dioxide increases and therefore project future warming that is unrealistically high.”11
•
Carbon dioxide as a primary “forcing” for planetary warming (or “climate change”) is a myth, as most recently demonstrated by - for example - “no change in the warming rate beyond the 1970s,”12 and research showing that doubling of CO2 cools polar (Arctic and Antarctic) regions, and that water vapor dampens the warming effect of increased CO2, contrary to IPCC claims.13