On September 18, 2003, a piece of news that had nothing to do with the entertainment industry sparked widespread discussion.▲∴

Dr. Chris De-Freitas, editor of the American academic journal Climate Research, boldly published a peer-reviewed article that is not politically oriented but factual. The article concluded that if climate change in the past thousand years is based on the background, recent climate warming is not an abnormal phenomenon.

After the article was published, it caused an uproar, and international global warming theorists quickly launched an attack on Dr. De Freitas, demanding his editorial position and university teaching position to be removed.

The World Meteorological Organization immediately released relevant data. So far in 2003, many places around the world have ushered in the hottest summer in history. The highest temperature in Grono Town, Switzerland reached 41.5 degrees Celsius, breaking the record for 139 years; the temperature in London, England reached 38.1 degrees Celsius, breaking the record for 1990; Similarly, the lowest temperature in Paris, France at night was 25.5 degrees Celsius, which also broke the record since 1873; and in addition, China's Taiwan/Bei, Shanghai/Hai, Wuhan, Fuzhou and other places have broken the local highest temperature records... The impact of the greenhouse effect has inevitably affected all parts of the world.

The British "Guardian" published a report on economics of climate change, which shows that if the lifestyle continued in 2003, by 2100, global temperatures would likely rise by 50% by 4 degrees Celsius. Once the temperature rises, it will disrupt the lives of millions of people around the world, and even the global ecological balance, and ultimately lead to large-scale migration and conflicts around the world.

For a time, Chris DeFreitas was like a rat crossing the street, suffering almost all-round blows. The United States was even more noisy.

Major newspapers including the Wall Street Journal, the Los Angeles Times, and the Seattle Post have discussed this matter, and the issue of greenhouse effect has once again become the focus of this debate.

As the newspaper with the greatest influence in North America, the New York Times naturally would not miss it. However, the New York Times did not express its views at the first time. Instead, after a series of investigations, on October 18, a month after Dr. Chris DeFreitas's controversy temporarily declined, a professional comment was published under the title "Is the greenhouse effect really that dangerous?"

Judging from the title, this article written by Javier Ulier actually defended Chris and stood on Chris' side, and the "New York Times" was also boldly published. This really caused an uproar.

Javier's article raises doubts, "The global climate has not shown a warming trend for more than a decade since the 1990s."

"In fact, we can't explain why there is no warming phenomenon now, which is undoubtedly an irony." However, Kevin also said that only when people believe in those computer models can we say that the climate has not warmed as scheduled.

In other words, the global climate is indeed warming, but computer models significantly exaggerate the impact of increased carbon dioxide on warming. As Chris’ article stated: warming today is a natural phenomenon since the development of the past thousand years, not caused by so-called greenhouse gas emissions.

After this article in the New York Times was published, the bomb was completely detonated.

Only real industry insiders know that the theory of climate change threat has benefited many people. It has caused government funds to flow into relevant academic research projects and become the government's route to expand bureaucracy. This argument is an excuse for the government to increase taxes and allow taxpayers to pay for corporate subsidies. It is also a bait for charitable foundations that attract huge donations to flow into the promised charitable foundations that promise to save the earth. Furthermore, the greenhouse effect is one of the important excuses used by Western countries to condemn and sanction China.

It can be imagined that a simple greenhouse effect involves too many benefits. If Chris's journal articles only trigger a series of conditioned reflexes, then the articles of the "New York Times" directly hit Mafengwo, and the entire United States and even the world were completely in full swing.

From October 18th, for a week, all of them were closely discussed, from meteorologists to government officials, from the World Meteorological Organization to the United Nations Commission on Meteorological Change, from North America to Africa, from Asia to South America,

The New York Times, in the eye of the storm, had to publish a sequel to its first report on October 24, also written by Javier, "Whose interests have the greenhouse effect touched?"

In this article, Javier has further analyzed the greenhouse effect research around the world. Unlike the first report, Javier emphasized that the greenhouse effect is indeed affecting people's lives, which cannot be ignored. Javier cites the research on greenhouse effect sponsored by the Rockefeller Foundation as evidence.

Research points out that the Amazon rainforest is gradually disappearing, making the crisis worse. The Amazon rainforest, known as the lungs of the earth, covers five percent of the earth's surface, creating 20% ​​of the world's oxygen and 30% of biological species. Due to the illegal logging and inadequate reclamation, the Amazon rainforest has disappeared 20% in the past four decades. This will aggravate global warming, and there are many creatures that can only survive in the rainforest and will also face the crisis of extinction.

But at the same time, Javier also said that the greenhouse effect must be taken seriously, but people blindly believe in scientists' research and computer operations, so they blindly invest in greenhouse effect research, without knowing that they are growing the spread of the disease.

At this point, Javier's words turned his head and directly pointed his finger at many foundations that were determined to "save the earth". The relevant funds of the foundation have not been invested in corresponding research, nor have they been invested in the real action of saving the earth. Regardless of whether the greenhouse effect is serious or not, sustainable development is a topic that must be paid attention to, and these foundations are consuming people's awareness of environmental protection.

After this comment from the New York Times was published, the whole society was in an uproar. It has to be admitted that as the largest newspaper in North America, the perspective and intention of the New York Times is indeed eye-catching. Those foundations use people's awareness of environmental protection to obtain benefits, and corruption and bribery are growing irresistibly. The action to save the earth is urgent. These people are still taking risks for the future of all mankind.

At the same time, Chris DeFreitas also said in public that this was his original intention of writing that article, because the 2004 presidential election was close to, and the issue of greenhouse effect became the authority for candidates to gain public support, but few people are truly willing to invest in scientific research.

This completely aroused the anger of environmentalists.

No one noticed that Chris made this remark after a regular cold-faced lawyer visited Chris three times; no one noticed that after Chris made this remark, all the allegations about him were revoked, and his position at university and his position as editor-in-chief of "Climate Research".

Because people are focusing on the demonstration at this time!

Environmentalists planned a massive demonstration. On November 1, at the gate of the New York City Government; on November 8, the marchers arrived at the gate of the White House in Washington. Surprisingly, Green Bay Packers' star Gowen Strello also came to Washington to support him. Not only Gowen arrived at the scene, but his teammates and coaches also arrived at the scene. Mark Murphy, the president and CEO of Green Bay Packers, also supported him.

The scale of the parade immediately rose to a higher level due to the arrival of well-known figures. On November 9, the NFL League press release also expressed support for the parade and demonstrations, "Everyone is responsible for protecting the environment. No matter when the disaster caused by the greenhouse effect will break out, it belongs to our planet." Subsequently, the leading players including Peyton-manning and Tom-brady expressed their support.

With the support of the No. 1 movement in the United States, things gradually began to ferment stronger power.

When the parade arrived at the gate of the Los Angeles city government on November 15, the cast led by Edward Norton, Leonardo Dicaprio, Julia Roberts, Kevin Spacey and others collectively joined the demonstration. The whole Hollywood caused a sensation, mobilizing more than 8,000 parades, pushing the debate to its peak.

As the march progresses, the attention of the news media is gradually heating up. Not only the candidates for presidential elections have come forward and expressed their positions righteously - there is no other choice in environmental protection; at the same time, the investigation on the Environmental Protection Foundation is also in full swing.

An anonymous whistleblower took the lead in exposing the internal secrets of a charitable foundation located in Silicon Valley. They made money under the name of "protecting the environment". In fact, all charitable donations were used to enjoy themselves. This led to a long vine, with a series of small gourds hanging on the vine. The inside story of the foundation was exposed and became infamous for a while.

Against this background, the march further escalated. On December 5, the National Weather Service in Silver Spring, Maryland, this march lasted for three days and summoned more than 6,000 protesters, with great momentum. On December 12, the demonstration returned to the gate of the White House in Washington, with more than 10,000 protesters sitting on the ground, hoping that the government can face environmental protection issues solemnly.

From September to December, no one could have expected that the long-standing greenhouse effect would have become the hottest issue after the presidential election began. If the Iraq War had not always been stuck in its throat, I was afraid that the discussion on the greenhouse effect would have risen again.

ps: The third update today, normal update is sent! Please subscribe!
Chapter completed!