Sorry, but that was a non-answer. I didn't ask why you were "deeply concerned about the issue". My question was "who's tipping the scales, and why"? You avoided answering either component.
I thought the following statement in my post at least provided part of the answer. There is rarely one simple answer to complex issues.
The history of mankind suggests that one cannot expect whole populations to do the right thing simply because it's sensible and rational. Many people are driven by greed for wealth and power, and others for basic necessities in order to survive. Corruption in politics and business is entrenched, world-wide, although it's worse in some countries than others. The Volkswagen scandal, using "defeat devices" to reduce emissions during testing, is a case in point.
In other words, creating fear and anxiety in the population, about the disastrous effects on climate from CO2 emissions from fossil fuels, will hopefully be more effective in reducing the 'real' pollutants from fossil fuels, by encouraging the transition to renewables. Simply expecting governments, especially governments in developing countries, to ensure best-practice emission controls are used in all coal-fired power plants and vehicles, in order to reduce the health problems from the 'real' pollutants, will not be as effective.
There is also another major issue involved; a likely scarcity of fossil fuels in the future as undeveloped countries become more developed and consume huge amounts of energy because of their large populations, like India and China are already doing.
Energy supplies are fundamental to everyone's prosperity. The more sources of energy, the better.
I have no objection to the development of alternative sources of energy, as long as it's done sensibly without causing disruption to electricity supplies, without increasing energy costs, without causing environmental damage, and most importantly, without deluding people into believing they will be safe from extreme weather events if CO2 levels are reduced.
The 97% of scientists who agree that CO2 is forcing global heating are demonstrably more interested in science than notoriety or money.
Wow!! How did you manage to interview all those scientists to determine that 97% of them agree that CO2 is forcing global warming?
Oh! You got it from the media. Right?
Did you ever investigate the scientific procedure that was used to arrive at that figure?
The following article addresses the process. The attached image from the article summarizes that process. In other words, that 97% figure applies only to those scientists who were willing to express a definite opinion on the role of CO2, in the abstracts of their peer-reviewed papers on climate that were examined. Two thirds of the abstracts expressed no view. It seems that most scientists understand that the role of human emissions of CO2 in warming the climate cannot be accurately quantified and is largely guesswork.
https://judithcurry.com/2015/12/20/what-is-there-a-97-consensus-about/
