Indeed, the Liar in Chief, and never held to account for it.

Because the left keeps using science as a false justification to inflict more looting on us. Until we can kill them off, we have to continually fight back. This guy just happened to be fed up with the false science and finally was able to prove it was the way he thought it was.

It tends to be human nature to do what your boss is paying you for even if you may not fully agree. It is also human nature to want to keep your job.
These facts can be ignored or taken into account.

Just look at what is happening to the humanities departments in many universities. And it’s spreading to all ages of student.

"what to do about it is totally debatable."
I have not heard a clear plan about what to do about it. I think they could do the best calculation possible of the costs and tax those activities. That's very hard to do because it's hard to measure those costs. There's also the risk that it would be just be another tax, with no corresponding decrease in income tax or other taxes. Working out the amount would be politicized. We still have people in denial of the basic facts. Imagine trying to work out numbers for a tax change that benefits high-income earners at the expense of people in jobs that contribute to climate change. Moreover, there will be hell to pay if new evidence is discovered showing the wishful thinking were right and that either human activities have less impact that we thought or the costs of the change are lower than we thought.

"hordes of publicly paid scientists"
This is the funniest part. Scientists are getting paid, so we can't trust science. Literally trillions of dollars of economic activity in some way contribute to climate change, so there's unbelievable pressure to understate it. So it's ironic when people say financial interest biases the science in the opposite direction.

Over thousands of years science points to there being “large” swings of climate temperatures, which were both higher, and lower, than anything in the last couple hundred years. Volcanos, on earth and in the oceans, and the sun’s radiation are the major causes of the changing climate.
How much mankind is also affecting the swings of the climate changing, in what way, with what possible consequences, in how much time, and what to do about it is totally debatable. But instead, it has become more of a political and ideological witch hunt. Punishing/shutting up those that question the testing or cherry picked conclusions of the collective hordes of publicly paid scientists.

"There is not [debate over the science]"
There's no serious debate that the evidence shows it's happening and is hastened by human activities. If this makes it's "settled science" then it is "settled science".
But science is always open to new evidence, and I will not be surprised if some revolution shows we were wrong in some major way. Wishful thinkers will say, "can't you guys just settle on one answer and stick to it?" That's not how science works though. The people who write these articles start with something they and I wish were true and then go looking for any anomalies they can use to get to the answer they (and I) want.

“The climate change deniers suggest there’s still a debate over the science. There is not!”
Obama

Sounds like “settled science" to me.

How many articles do we need tearing down the straw man of "settled science" (a contradiction in terms) and "doomsday forecasts"? It's almost like people think if they keep writing enough articles about that it will make global warming go away.

This sums up the biggest problem concerning global wa...I mean, climate change:
“
...science is not supposed to have a politically predetermined outcome pushed by ideology and politics. This new nitrogen study is but one example of consensus science being overturned. The global warming science establishment should now be open to similar studies and dissenting voices on CO2 to overturn the alleged climate change consensus."

But will they?
“