Outdated Climate Hansenism, The Club Of Rome CO₂ bias

Climate Hansenism refers to the school of thought linked to James Hansen, the former NASA pseudo-climate scientist who became one of the Club Of Rome most prominent advocates to instill the Club policy that CO₂ is the primary driver of global warming to frame Human, totrade.co/rome.

In practice, Hansenism is characterized by focus on CO₂ as the main cause of climate change, hide the decline, manipulate data to propagandize the "Hockey Stick" warming... totrade.co/hs.

Hansenism Ignore

Galactic Cosmic Rays (GCRs) are ultra high-energy particles from outside the Solar System. They interact with Earth’s atmosphere (and its interior), totrade.co/gc, which is mostly Nitrogen N₂ (~78%), Oxygen O₂ (~21%), Water Vapor H₂O (~0–4%), and Argon Ar (~0.92%)—not CO₂. Climate responds to GCRs Wave arriving in multi-millennia wavelength, totrade.co/mm. 

The Sun, 1.3 million times larger than Earth and powered by nuclear fusion, cannot be compared to CO₂, an inert trace gas at only 0.04% of the atmosphere. Climate responds to Earth’s rotation, seasonal shifts, day and night cycles, sunspot activity, totrade.co/sm, which regulate solar (and GCRs) energy reaching the surface.

Yet the Club of Rome narrative stays CO₂-centric, blaming humans. In reality, CO₂—just 0.04% of the air—is inert, odorless, colorless, and functions mainly as plant food, the only role the Sun and GCRs directly play with CO₂ for plant photosynthesis.

The First Global Revolution – A Report by the Council of the Club of Rome, p.75
“In searching for a common enemy against whom we can unite, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like, would fit the bill. In their totality and their interactions these phenomena do constitute a common threat which must be confronted by everyone together.” (The First Global Revolution – A Report by the Council of the Club of Rome, numbered p75, PDF: totrade.co/cor, actual p86). They settled on Anthropogenic Global warming – warming due to man’s activities.

The suggestion that pollution, global warming, and famine could serve as a common enemy to unite humanity was notably put forward by the Club of Rome in its 1991 report, The First Global Revolution. The report suggested that these phenomena could act as unifying threats against which the world could come together.

However, the Club of Rome also warned that designating these environmental issues as "the enemy" mistakes CO₂ symptoms for causes. Since these problems are caused by human activities, the true enemy, in this line of thinking, is "humanity itself", not CO₂. This perspective highlights the key challenges of using environmental crises as a unifying force, both in its potential to inspire cooperation and its inherent complexities.

How environmental threats can be a unifying force
Encourages cooperation over conflict: Game theory suggests that when nations face a common, existential threat from which no single nation can be safe, the rational strategy is to set aside conflicts and unite. In this scenario, victory over a traditional rival would be a "pyrrhic" one if the shared enemy still ultimately prevails.

Shifts security focus: As globalization has amplified the reach of environmental and humanitarian issues, the focus of security efforts has broadened beyond borders and traditional conflict. The pervasive nature of these non-traditional threats necessitates international cooperation and coordinated solutions at all levels.

Spurs collective action: The international community has already proven its capacity for a unified response to certain environmental issues. The 1987 Montreal Protocol, which united the world to phase out ozone-depleting substances, serves as a successful historical precedent. Similarly, the 2015 Paris Agreement is a legally binding international treaty that commits nearly 200 parties to mitigate climate change and adapt to its impacts.

Why uniting against environmental threats is difficult
The threat can be abstract:
Some arguments suggest that abstract threats like global warming are not as effective at uniting people as more concrete and visible threats, such as a fictional alien invasion. The impacts of climate change can feel distant and gradual to some, lacking the immediate, visceral effect of a visible enemy.

Entrenched political divisions:
Even with a common enemy, ideological and political polarization can divide humanity on how to best tackle the threat. In many countries, environmental issues have become a partisan battleground, with conservatives and progressives holding fundamentally different beliefs about the severity of the problems and the appropriate solutions.
The risk of blaming "humanity itself": The Club of Rome's warning that "the real enemy is humanity itself" highlights a major philosophical and ethical hurdle. Defining humanity as the problem can lead to a sense of fatalism and inhibit concrete, actionable solutions. Effective action requires addressing the specific behaviors and systems causing the damage, rather than condemning the entire species.

Perceptions of historical injustice:
Efforts to unify against climate change can be hampered by debates over "historical climate injustice". Developing nations may argue that developed countries, which are largely responsible for historical carbon emissions, should bear a greater burden of the costs and sacrifices required to address the crisis. This can generate conflict over the distribution of responsibility, undermining unity.