I get it now. This definitely seems plausible.

Scientific consensus is correct, until you bring tons of proofs that could reverse it (which didn’t happen in the last hundreds years). About what you said, we could say exactly the opposite: industries (big polluters, which include politicians) have already to much power, wealth and etc. and want to protect it. I remember to You that we are already following the big polluters agenda, since the start of Industrial Revolution! We are the consequence of past acts : polluting without limits, global ppm rising and 6 earth limits already reached. (Just look at the place where you live, how much waste there is, how much CO2 we produce, etc.etc.). Our world is insane for the good and for the bad. Let’s focus on what we can change! Let’s be pragmatic. Global warming could be used by some politicians to impose their ideas? Yes, it probably will and already is for past events. But for me, the most important is not to cry about what they want to do. My main focus is to listen to science which means to reduce our CO2/methane production. It means for example to be able to produce our own free electricity (solar panels, like my grandpa did 30 years ago). Economically and ecologically good (even if Oil lobbyist say the opposite). And then the next focus would be to work with every level of our societies to reach the net-zero emissions goal. 👀✅ I see it as a way to be independent, self-sovereign in many aspects and earth-friendly in many others.

Montreal protocol and international cooperation to reduce CFCs. What we should have for fossil fuels and other pollutants. You didn’t answer my comment tho. You’re just adding more disinformation without any reliable source.