you are both right and wrong with your simplistic view that CO2 runs the climate.
I'm not sure who you mean here, but I am sure no one believes that CO2 "runs" theclimate - THAT is simplistic.
But most scientists believe is that AGW plays a role in altering the climate. That does not mean that the sun or orbital path of the earth do not also alter the climate.
You can find scientists on both sides of the argument. Which side is telling the truth?
Research Maurice Strong to find the father of global warming. No he wants your land and food.
It's about controlling people and making money. PERIOD
And that is my biggest fear. The numbnuts who cut and paste scientific sounding words from websites--they almost NEVER link them you understand--and it is obvious from their subsequent comments that they have zero understanding of anything they posted--nevertheless feed the fires of those who desperately want AGW to be a fact. I even see the comments of oil companies getting on board. They have too much integrity to really buy into the AGW religion, but they will mention something about what they are doing to lessen CO2 and other green house emissions.
I recently asked a high ranking oil company person about that on their website and are they really buying into the whole CO2 acceleration meme. His reply was "Oh hell no. And what we're doing isn't going to help much if at all. But the government is paying us lots of millions of dollars for green energy technology and if we don't do it, our competitors will."
So from T Boone Pickens to GE to hundreds of other groups and corporations over the country, billions and billions of dollars are up for grabs. If the government is going to shovel out the money anyway, who would say they don't deserve a piece of that pie, most especially when they have paid in massive taxes with little or nothing returned from those?
Pickens by the way got out of he wind energy business when government subsidies became harder to come by and he was losing his shirt. He said it just isn't economically feasiable at this time, will never be as efficient as oil and gas, and produces nowhere near the paying jobs that oil and gas produce. He is now wheeling and dealing with Congress in hopes of snagging $28 billion in subsidies to develop more and better uses of natural gas. But he doesn't think much of Obama's energy policy. Says there isn't one actually.
Pickens is just the tip of the iceberg on all this. You are absolutely right. The evidence is coming out all the time that it has never been about saving our climate. It has always been about money, power, and control.