What would be the endgame? None easily seen. But, there sure is profit in denying it.

Problem is, regardless if true or not, the risks of using fossil fuels are still terrible for ppl & natural resources. Why risk it when other alternatives are available? Contamination of water with spills, health impact from burning them is very bad. Why make ppl sick when we don't have to?

As usual... follow the $.

Carbon Trading aka 'follow the money!'( http://www.investopedia.com/terms/c/carbontrade.asp) )

money is always the endgame

Obviously the Jews are behind it and they're going to say that Global Warming has caused the Middle East and Africa to become uninhabitable and thus we have to take all the Saracens and dindus in.

You must also look at how much money the gov paid to research it . Hundreds of millions have been paid out and they always need more to continue to follow the changes .

Just a knee jerk reaction off the top of my head; either bankers or politicians. It gives them an excuse to add regulations allowing them more control over industries (letting them strangle out unwanted competition and support their preferred monopolies). It also gives politicians an issue they can fight over, having voters side strongly with one party or the other, without the parties having to provide tangible results to earn support.

I do think mankind affects the environment, I just think the analysis of the issue and the decisions on how to deal with the issue, have been dominated by politics rather than science. We get a lot of shaming and fearmongering, but we rarely get a clear picture of what we need to accomplish and what we need to do to achieve it.

Anyone remember global cooling? When I was very young I was taught pollution blocked the sun resulting in global cooling which would lead to disaster if left unchecked (my school's curriculum was probably out of date). Why were they convinced of that? They were actually observing global cooling. Looking at the data we have, there seems to be a natural cycle which should be in a cooling phase around our time. Why was I told global cooling was a man made problem when it's indicated as part of a natural cycle? Why was global warming not seen as escaping the natural disaster of global cooling? Look up John van Neumann on climate control and see what you think.

The biggest who is James Hansen.

LINK 1

LINK 2

The end game is control over the energy sector.

It is a Globalist ruse to get people to relinquish their federal sovereignty for a new Global Order. By presenting a global threat, they can claim that only a global solution will work. All the International agreements so far have placed constraints on western countries and required significant transfer of their citizens wealth to the third world. The Trump supporters realized this and supported a Nationalist candidate who will put the US first. The Brits rejected globalism with Brexit. France is waking up with Le Pen. The US election and the pending breakup of the EU has put the Globalist back a few years.