Category: Polarizing Fact

The Sun is not the Cause of the current Global Warming

Superfact 124: The Sun is not the cause of current global warming. According to data from NASA, solar energy output has shown no net increase since the late 1970s. In addition, the amount of solar energy Earth receives has followed the Sun’s natural 11-year cycle of small ups and downs with no net increase. Over the same period, global temperature has risen significantly. The current warming is driven by human-made greenhouse gases, not changes in the Sun.

A thin yellow line graph (on black background) shows the sun’s irradiance fluctuating every 11 year. However, it does not go up overall, but it rather goes down even though the red line graph showing temperature rises sharply. | The Sun is not the Cause of the current Global Warming
Solar irradiance (yellow) plotted with temperature (red) since 1880. NASA, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons.

The graph above compares global surface temperature changes (red line) and the Sun’s energy received by Earth (yellow line) in watts (units of energy) per square meter since 1880. The lighter/thinner lines show the yearly levels while the heavier/thicker lines show the 11-year average trends. Eleven-year averages are used to reduce the year-to-year natural noise in the data, making the underlying trends more obvious. You can read more about why the Sun is not the Cause of the current Global Warming, here or here or here.

The sun from space on a dark background. High quality photo.
Elements of this image furnished by NASA. Shutterstock asset id: 2454170413 by Artsiom P

The evidence that the current rapid global warming is chiefly caused by our burning of fossil fuels is extensive and for all practical purposes conclusive. Explaining why no known natural cause for climate change can explain the current warming is just one small piece of the evidence. However, it is one item that people tend to get stuck on. You often hear claims such as “climate has always changed”, “I think it is a natural cause, like the sun”, or “have you ever heard of orbital cycles?”.

Well, as one would expect, the scientists and the experts on past climate, and the scientific organizations around the world, have very carefully investigated whether natural causes could be behind the current rapid warming and we have known for many decades that the answer is no. It is not orbital cycles, it is not the sun, it is not volcanoes, etc. My first post in the series regarding why no known natural cause of climate change can explain the current warming was “Orbital Cycles are not the Cause of the current Global Warming”. This post is about why it can’t be Sun.

The picture shows a bright shining down on planet Earth lighting up the planet a bit. The light from the sun is intense. | The Sun is not the Cause of the current Global Warming
Sun shining down on Earth. Shutterstock asset id: 2709145593 by buradaki

One reason we know that it can’t be orbital cycles causing the current rapid global warming is that orbital cycles operate over tens of thousands of years or hundreds of thousands of years. That is not true for the sun, which has much faster fluctuations. However, it is true for both orbital cycles and the sun that they are not increasing the heat Earth receives. In fact, the effects of Orbital Cycles are slowly cooling Earth, not warming it, and the sun’s energy output has not shown any net increase.

In addition, if the current global warming was the sun or orbital cycles then the upper atmosphere would be warming just like the lower atmosphere, but the upper atmosphere is not warming, it is cooling. That’s an effect that is similar to a blanket holding heat in, which would happen if greenhouse gases were warming the Earth. Add to that the fact that the distribution of temperature increases in time and space matches the way greenhouse gases warm the Earth but does not match the way the sun or orbital cycles would warm the Earth.

A bright white sun is setting over Earth
Sunset from the International Space Station by NASA

I am considering this a super fact because a lot of people have been fooled by disinformation to believe that natural causes are the likely explanation. About 15-20 years ago, I was bamboozled by the disinformation myself. Since this is an important topic and this fact is likely surprising or even challenging to many people, it is a super fact in my opinion.

Understanding a topic and understanding the evidence makes all the difference. Something I had to relearn. That is also why climate scientists are near unanimous around the world over that climate change / global warming is both real and caused by us.

Past Climate the last 150,000 Years

The graph shows the temperature since the last ice age. There is a maximum temperature about 6,000 years ago, then a cooling and then a sharp uptick in temperature.
This graph shows global temperature going back twenty thousand years. Notice the relatively stable temperature during the last 10,000 years, coinciding with the development of human civilization. Also notice the maximum temperature around 6,000 years ago. It is referred to as the Holocene climatic optimum. Finally, notice the sudden sharp increase in temperature at the end. It is depicted in red and is not natural.
The graph shows wild swings over the last 150,000 years and then a very sharp uptick at the end. | The Sun is not the Cause of the current Global Warming
Temperature record for the last 150,000 years. Again, notice the sharp uptick towards the end. This picture is taken from this article.

A Couple of Videos and Links

The video below is a short one-minute overview of the causes behind global warming.

The video below from NASA is a bit longer, 13 minutes, but it gives a more detailed overview. Click here to see the page from where this is coming from.

You can read some more about why it isn’t sun that is causing the current global warming here, and here, or here.

Conclusion

We know that the Sun is not responsible for the current rapid global warming because the Sun’s energy output has shown no net increase since the late 1970s. In addition, the amount of solar energy Earth receives has followed the Sun’s natural 11-year cycle of small ups and downs with no net increase.

We know that Sun is not responsible for the current rapid global warming because if it was the Sun the upper atmosphere would not be cooling and the temperature increases would be distributed differently across Earth and distributed differently with respect to time.

Other super facts related to global warming

To see the other Super Facts click here

Orbital Cycles are not the Cause of the current Global Warming

Superfact 122: We know that the current global warming, or if you call it Climate Change, or Climate Disruption, is caused by us primarily because of our burning of fossil fuels. It is not “natural causes”, and it is not orbital cycles, so called Milankovitch cycles. These orbital cycles include changes in orbital eccentricity, axial tilt, and axial precession.

Three illustrated orbital cycles. On the left orbital eccentricity, in the middle is the axial tilt and on the right axial precession. | Orbital Cycles are not the Cause of the current Global Warming
Illustration of Milankovitch cycles from MIT’s Climate Primer.

The evidence that the current rapid global warming is chiefly caused by our burning of fossil fuels is extensive and for all practical purposes conclusive. One of the steps towards understanding this evidence is understanding why no known natural cause of climate change can explain the current warming, and that includes orbital cycles. Therefore, this post is just one small step towards preparing you for the evidence that the current rapid global warming is chiefly caused by us. However, there is a lot of disinformation around this specific topic.

Hockey stick curve going back 1,000 years. The recent uptick in global temperature is very sharp and very sudden.
The so-called hockey stick curve depicting the last 1,000 years. The blue line is the first hockey stick curve ever created (by Michael Mann). He used proxy measurements such as tree rings, green-dots 30-year average, red temperature measurements. Wikimedia commons <<https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/deed.en>>. This graph is taken from this page.
Again, hockey stick curve going back 1,000 years. This time human causes and natural causes are indicated with a black respective a red shape. | Orbital Cycles are not the Cause of the current Global Warming
The so-called hockey stick curve depicting the last 1,000 years. In this graph I have indicated what part of the graph is climate change caused by natural causes respective climate change caused by human causes.

Very briefly; Earth’s orbital cycles, called the Milankovitch cycles are largely responsible for the ice ages, but they are not responsible for the current warming because the current warming is too rapid for the orbital cycles to be the cause, and the way the warming is happening is incompatible with how a warming caused by Milankovitch cycles would have happened. In addition, according to the Milankovitch cycles we should be cooling, not warming.

I am considering this a super fact because a lot of people have been fooled by the disinformation on this topic, and there is also a lot of gaslighting from less than reputable organizations and from politicians. They have bamboozled a lot of people. About 15 years ago, I was bamboozled by the disinformation myself. That was before I took the time to try to understand the topic. Understanding a topic, and understanding the evidence makes all the difference, and that is why climate scientists are near unanimous the world over that climate change / global warming is both real and caused by us.

Ask yourself, why would the climate scientists and the atmospheric physicists around the world, including scientists at NASA and NOAA, not investigate orbital cycles and other natural causes for climate change as a possible cause for our current warming? They are the experts on orbital cycles and past climate after all. We know that orbital cycles are not the cause of the current global warming, and this is important to know. Therefore, I think it is a super fact.

What Are Orbital Cycles?

One type of important type of climate forcing that’s been the cause behind the multiple ice ages that we’ve had over the last two million years are earth’s orbital cycles, or the Milankovitch cycles. There are primarily three orbital cycles, orbital eccentricity, change in axial tilt, and axial precession. Could they explain the current warming? No, they can’t because they are too slow, we are currently in a cycle that should be cooling the planet, and the way orbital cycles would warm the planet if they were responsible for the warming is very different from what we are witnessing.

Changes in Eccentricity

Earth’s orbit is not a perfect circle. Earth’s orbit varies from nearly circular to slightly elliptical and this change can cause climate change. This shift in Earth’s orbit takes place over periods of about 100,000 and 400,000 years. Click on the video from NASA below for an illustration of Earth’s eccentricity.

Changes in Obliquity (Tilt)

The angle Earth’s axis of rotation is tilted as it travels around the Sun is known as obliquity. Obliquity is why Earth has seasons. Over the last million years, it has varied between 22.1 and 24.5 degrees with respect to Earth’s orbital plane. The greater Earth’s axial tilt angle, the more extreme our seasons are. In addition, a larger tilt angle favor periods of deglaciation. The changes of Earth’s obliquity have a period of 41,000 years. Click on the video from NASA below for an illustration of the changes in obliquity.

Axial Precession (Wobble)

Earth wobbles slightly as it rotates, like a slightly off-center spinning top. The axis of Earth’s wobble changes slowly and is called axial precession. The corresponding cycle spans 25,771.5 years, or approximately 26,000 years. Click on the video from NASA below for an illustration of the changes in axial precession.

Video Explaining Earth’s Orbital Cycles

The video below from PBS gives an explanation and overview of earth’s three orbital cycles.

Orbital cycles are far too Slow to Cause the Rapid Global Warming Happening Today

The changes in Earth’s orbit and tilt operate over 20,000+ to 100,000-year periods, making Orbital Cycles unable to drive the sharp temperature spikes seen in a single century.

The graph shows the temperature since the last ice age. There is a maximum temperature about 6,000 years ago, then a cooling and then a sharp uptick in temperature.
Global temperature going back twenty thousand years, a hockey stick graph. Notice the stable temperature during the last 10,000 years, coinciding with the development of human civilization, and also notice the sudden sharp increase at the end. Orbital cycles can’t explain that, and it certainly does not look natural.

Orbital Cycles Predict Slow Cooling, not Rapid Heating

About 6,000 years ago Earth’s temperature was a bit warmer than it is today largely due to the climate fluctuations caused by orbital cycles. The warm period in the beginning of the Holocene epoch is referred to as the Holocene climatic optimum. Natural causes for climate change caused Earth’s temperature to slowly cool off until the recent very sudden uptick in average global temperatures.

Orbital Cycles are not the Cause of the current Global Warming
Temperature record for the last 150,000 years. Notice the sharp uptick towards the end. This picture is taken from this article.
The graph shows wild swings over the last 50,000 years and then a very sharp uptick at the end, which as indicated in the graph is caused by us.
Temperature record for the last 50,000 years. Notice the sharp uptick towards the end. I have circled natural and human caused causes for the climate change. This picture is taken from this article.

Below is a video that explains in greater detail why orbital cycles cannot explain the current warming. You can also read more about it here.

The Cooling of the Upper Atmosphere Tells Us the Current Warming is not Caused by Orbital Cycles or the Sun

Yes, the cooling of the upper atmosphere (specifically the stratosphere above the troposphere) is a key sign that current global warming is not caused by Milankovitch cycles or changes in the sun. Instead, observations show a warming lower layer (troposphere) and a cooling upper layer, which is the exact “fingerprint” of human-caused greenhouse gases. Other evidence that the warming is caused by greenhouse gases and not orbital cycles or the sun is the distribution of the warming across the globe and over time.

A Couple of Videos

The video below is a short one-minute overview of the causes behind global warming.

The video below from NASA is a bit longer, 13 minutes, but it gives a more detailed overview. Click here to see the page from where this is coming from.

Conclusion

We know that Orbital Cycles are not responsible for the current rapid global warming because Orbital Cycles operate on tens of thousands of years or hundreds of thousands of years, not a couple of centuries.

We know that Orbital Cycles are not responsible for the current rapid global warming because the effects of Orbital Cycles are slowly cooling Earth, not warming it.

We know that Orbital Cycles are not responsible for the current rapid global warming because if it was orbital cycles (or the sun) the upper atmosphere would not be cooling and the temperature increases would be distributed differently across Earth and distributed differently with respect to time.

Other super facts related to global warming

To see the other Super Facts click here

Deforestation peaked back in the 1980s

Super fact 45 : Deforestation peaked back in the 1980s, meaning that is when it was worst. Deforestation has not stopped but the rate of deforestation has slowed as a result of government policies, corporate initiatives, and international agreements.

The rate of global deforestation has slowed significantly since the 1980s. Overall we are still losing forests. We had a 47-million-hectare loss of forest in the last decade, which is very bad, but that is better than the 151-million-hectare loss of forest in the 1980s. For temperate forests we have succeeded in reversing deforestation and temperate forests are now gaining forest. To read more about how government policies, corporate initiatives, and international agreements have slowed the rate of deforestation you can click here, or here, or here.

Aerial photo of a forest. The upper left side shows lot of green trees whilst the lower right side is brown
Amazon rainforest illegal deforestation landscape. Aerial view of trees cut and burned to make land for agriculture and cattle pasture in Amazonas, Brazil. Asset id: 2471967219 by PARALAXIS

This is a super fact because we get a lot of bad news about deforestation, and we should, it is still a big problem. However, we are making progress and because of our negativity bias as well as that of the media, we tend to miss the story about the progress. Therefore, the fact that we are making progress comes as a surprise to many people.

The graphs show that during the 1700’s and the first half of the 1800’s the loss of forests was 19 million acres per decade. From the mid-1800’s to 1920 it was roughly 30 million acres per decade and from the 1920 and on it was 115 million acres per decade until the 1980s and the first half of the 1990s when it was 151 million acres per decade. Since then, it has fallen and in the last decade forest loss was 47 million acres | Proof that deforestation peaked back in the 1980s
Decadal losses in global forest over the last three centuries. Decadal forest loss is measured as the average net loss every ten years, in hectares. This deforestation minus increases in forest area through afforestation. There is no single dataset that applies consistent or transparent methodology for deforestation over centuries. Two different datasets are therefore shown: these still shown the overall development and transition of forestation from temperate to tropical areas, but magnitudes should not be combined at the crossover point. Data sources: Pre-1995 data from Williams (2006). The second series is based on data from UN FAO Global Forest Resources Assessments. The graph comes from Our World in Data – Research and data to make progress against the world’s largest problems.

Peak Agricultural Land

There is one aspect to this story which both explains part of the reduction in deforestation but also provides additional hope for the future and that is that even though the world produces more food than ever, the amount of land we use for doing that is falling. Global land use for agriculture has peaked and is now falling. There has been a global decoupling of agricultural land and food production. I should explain that agricultural land is the total amount of arable land that is used to grow crops, and pasture used to raise livestock. That global land use for agriculture has peaked is illustrated in the graph below.

The graph shows a green line chart representing global agricultural land use and an orange line chart representing global agricultural production. The orange line graph keeps rising but the green line chart peaks and then starts going down | Evidence that deforestation peaked back in the 1980s
Global decoupling of agricultural land and food production. Agricultural land is the sum of cropland and pasture for grazing livestock. Production is measured in constant 2015 international dollars, which adjusts for inflation. Includes all crops and livestock. Data source: Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. Our World in Data – Research and data to make progress against the World’s largest problems.

There are more trees now than 35 years ago (there’s a catch)

Another related good news story is that there are more trees in the world today than there were 35 years ago. A lot of the losses of forest in tropical areas have been compensated for by gains in Europe, North America and Asia. For example, tree planting programs in places like China have added a lot of trees as well as forests. In addition to tree planting programs climate change resulting in northern latitudes warming has resulted in temperate forests expanding.

However, this story is not as good as it sounds. There is a huge catch and that is that there is an important distinction between tree cover and forest cover. Tree cover refers to the total area covered by trees, while forest cover specifically refers to areas where trees form a forest ecosystem. Tree cover has increased but as you can guess from the graph above depicting global deforestation, the forest cover continues to decrease.

In addition, a lot of trees were planted for industrial timber plantations, mature oil palm estates and other specifically planted forests. These add to the global tree cover but not necessarily to biodiversity. Not all tree planting is equal.

So even though having more trees compared to 35 years ago is a good thing, it may not be as great as it sounds and does not contradict the fact that deforestation continues. This is important to point out because there are those who attempt to use the fact that we now have more trees to make the case that the talk about deforestation is a hoax. Don’t fall for that.

Summary

The good news is that even though deforestation is still happening the rate of it has slowed down. It peaked in the 1980s. This slowdown is largely due to government policies, corporate initiatives, and international agreements. An additional circumstance that aids in slowing deforestation is that the amount of land we use for agriculture is falling and we have passed peak land use for agriculture. Another positive situation is that we now have more trees than 35 years ago.

However, it is important to point out that does not mean that deforestation has been reversed. Tree cover and forest cover are not the same thing. The benefit of this is limited even though it is still a good thing to have more trees.

Environmental Success Stories

Aside from the success in reducing the rate of deforestation there is additional surprising, as well as good news regarding the environment.

To see the other Super Facts click here

The US is the largest cumulative emitter of carbon

Super fact 43 : The United States has emitted more CO2 than any other country to date, around 400 billion tons since 1751. It is responsible for 25% of historical emissions. Click here.

But what about China? That is 12.7%, or around half. This is surprising information to many Americans, yet it is true, and therefore a super fact. In the US it is very common to blame China for our carbon emissions. In China they blame the US. In Europe they blame the US and China. Who is right? It turns out that the blame game is complicated and futile.

Carbon Emissions Around the World

Who should we blame the most for our carbon emissions?

In other words, if you want to blame another country for the carbon emissions, take your pick, well your cherry pick. Why should we do something about our carbon emissions when X is worse? Those who want no action on the global warming / climate change problem love the blame game. Like denial or despair, which are both irrational positions, the blame game hinders action. The blame game can also get very complicated and contentious.

The nine graphs are complex but show that among the nine countries/regions the United States currently has the highest emissions, followed by Canada, and the China, then South Africa, then the European Union, then comes the United Kingdom, and the World, and finally India and Kenya | The US is the largest cumulative emitter of carbon
The graph shows the fossil fuel emissions (in carbon dioxide equivalents) per capita from 1750 to 2023 for the World, the United States, Canada, China, European Union, India, South Africa, United Kingdom, and Kenya. Notice that the United Kingdom dominated the emissions in the 1700’s and 1800’s. Data source: Global Carbon Budget (2024); Population based on various sources (2024). The graph is from Our World in Data .

Note regarding the graph above: By clicking here you can find this graph and then select to display any set of countries or regions. Have fun experimenting.

Note regarding Fossil emissions: Fossil emissions measure the quantity of carbon emissions (CO2) emitted from the burning of fossil fuels, and directly from industrial processes such as cement and steel production. Fossil CO2 includes emissions from coal, oil, gas, flaring, cement, steel, and other industrial processes. Fossil emissions do not include land use change, deforestation, soils, or vegetation.

Overview of Cumulative Carbon Emissions

As you can see in the graph below the cumulative carbon emissions from 1751 to 2017 are 25% for the United States, 22% for the EU (28 countries), 12.7% for China, 6% for Russia, 4% for Japan, and 3% for India. If you count the entire continent of Europe, you get 33% for Europe.

The graph shows differently colored rectangles with the area of the rectangle corresponding to the cumulative carbon emissions. Each rectangle corresponds to a country or a region.
Figures for the 28 countries in the European Union have been grouped as the EU-28 since international targets and negotiations are typically set as a collaborative target between EU countries. Values may not sum up to 100% due to rounding. Data Source: Calculated by Our World in Data from the Global Carbon Project (GCP) and Carbon Dioxide Analysis Center (CDIAC). This is a visualization from Our World in Data, where you can find data and research on how the world is changing.
To see the other Super Facts click here

Scientists Agree that Global Warming is happening and that we are the Cause

Super fact 34: Climate Scientists agree that Global Warming or if you call it Climate Change is happening, and that it is caused by us primarily because of our burning of fossil fuels. There is a long-standing scientific consensus on these two facts because the evidence is conclusive. Typically, studies show an agreement of at least 97% or 98% among climate scientists.

This is a super fact because surveys show that this is not what the public believes and yet it is true. The public incorrectly believes that there is a large disagreement among scientists on this topic. A note, to understand why the evidence is conclusive as to why global warming is happening and is caused by us click here.

Note : I will use the term “global warming” in this review. Whether you call the phenomenon climate change, climate disruption, or global heating, is not important.

The Scientific Consensus

This extensive survey from 2013 of 12,000 climate papers (papers published over two decades) by Dana Nuccitelli and Cook, etc., concluded that 97.1% of climate scientists endorsed the consensus position that humans are causing global warming.

They also did a science author self-rating which concluded that 97.2% of climate scientists endorsed the consensus position that humans are causing global warming. Another conclusion from the survey was that the consensus had increased from around 90%, perhaps less, in the early 1990’s.

A later review of six independent, peer-reviewed studies examining the scientific consensus about global warming have concluded that between 90% and 100% of climate scientists are convinced human-caused global warming is happening. A more recent study (2021) found that as many as 98% of climate scientists are convinced global warming is happening and is human-caused. Numerous other surveys have concluded the same thing.

People’s Beliefs About Global Warming

This 2024 survey from Yale University show that most Americans (61%) understand that global warming is mostly human caused. By contrast, 28% think it is caused mostly by natural changes in the environment. Most Americans (58%) <<Link-6>> understand that most scientists think global warming is happening. This percentage has trended generally upward since this survey began in 2008. By contrast, about one in five (22%) think there is a lot of disagreement among scientists about whether global warming is happening.

The green graph is going up slightly starting from 46% in 2009 and ending in 58% in 2023. The black graph starts at 33% in 2009 and ends in 22% in 2023. The yellow graph starts at 2% in 2009 and ends in 2% in 2023 | Scientists Agree that Global Warming is happening and that we are the Cause
The green graph corresponds to “most scientists think global warming is happening (%).” The black graph corresponds to “there is a lot of disagreement among scientists (%)”. The yellow graph corresponds to “Most scientists think global warming is NOT happening (%)”. Graph taken from the Yale Program on Climate Change Communication.

However, only one in five Americans (20%) understand that nearly all climate scientists (more than 90%) think that human-caused global warming is happening. The aforementioned Dana  Nuccitelli refers to this in his book Climatology versus Pseudoscience as the consensus gap. Again, this large discrepancy between public perception and reality makes the consensus gap a super fact. Research has shown that this discrepancy has a large impact on people’s other beliefs regarding global warming.

This is bar graph. It shows that 2% believe the answer is 0-10%, 2% believe the answer is 11-20%, 3% believe the answer is 21-30%, 3% believe the answer is 31-40%, 8% believe the answer is 41-50%, 7% believe the answer is 51-60%, 7% believe the answer is 61-70%, 13% believe the answer is 71-80%, 13% believe the answer is 81-90%, 20% believe the answer is 91-100%, 22% don’t know | Scientists Agree that Global Warming is happening and that we are the Cause
The question was, To the best of your knowledge what percentage of climate scientists think that human-caused global warming is happening? Graph taken from the Yale Program on Climate Change Communication.

Why is there a Consensus Gap?

In his book Climatology versus Pseudoscience Dana Nuccitelli explains that a relatively small group of so-called climate skeptics, or more accurately called climate contrarians have received a lot of attention from media. Even though their science is bad, and they’ve published their error ridden papers in obscure or discredited journals, and the fact that their predictions have failed repeatedly many times over, they have had an enormous influence on public discourse. Conservative politicians, and many talk show hosts are blindly devoted to their falsehoods, whilst real scientists are being attacked.

It is not just rightwing media who are using them for their purposes, but mainstream media are giving the contrarians undue attention as well. Sensationalism is one issue. A science contrarian claiming that all the climate scientists are wrong, and that he is the only one who finally got it right is a lot more interesting of a story than a repeat of the consensus. Another issue is false balance. Journalist should not feel that they must give equal time to evidence-based science and nonsense, but that is often the case. To read my review of this book click here.

The Oregon Petition

I am mentioning the Oregon petition because I fell for it myself. The Oregon petition was an official looking petition circulated by climate contrarians, claiming that there is no evidence that human-caused global warming will cause catastrophic heating of earth’s atmosphere and disruption of earth’s climate, and that adding more carbon dioxide to the atmosphere would even be beneficial for plants and animals. It got an impressive number of signatures, 32,000 after some years.

However, it turned out that the signatories rarely had climate expertise, and were not scientists, and the survey listed many falsified names such as the names of the Spice Girls and several fictional characters. Less than 200 of the signatories were climate researchers.

It was a con, but it was touted in a lot of media as the truth. I saw it over and over and I believed it. I was later surprised to learn that it was a con and that a scientific consensus existed on global warming / climate change. Learning that I had been bamboozled on this matter was one of the red flags that prompted me to start doing some fact checking on the issue global warming.

To see the other Super Facts click here