PROPOSALS FOR NEW STRATEGIES,
FOR USE IN THE FIGHT TO LIMIT GLOBAL WARMING
​
Despite having the best intentions, the strategies and tactics used, so far, by people involved in the fight to help control global warming, simply have not worked "adequately" – defined as, "in ways that have been able to actually achieve the necessary results".
As part of an effort to try to "improve our game", the list below is a summary listing of several proposed strategies that should at least be considered, by groups of environmental advocates who want to increase their effectiveness, and their likelihood of being able to help create and accomplish genuine, measurable, real-world results.
As stated on the first page of this website, we need to focus – hard – on what is truly important, because the "paid disrupters" will do everything they can to inject clutter, confusion, meaningless trivia, and distractions into any efforts to create actual progress in the right direction. Therefore, the list below has been limited to only a few proposals and recommendations, and even these are offered only as a starting point, as nominees, with the hope that if any "Global Warming Strategy Councils" are actually formed, they will analyze and eventually choose only a limited number of these, and place enough focused weight and attention on a limited number of proven-to-be-effective tactics and efforts, to begin making actual, real-world (and, political-world) progress. Rather than trying to tell people, “You need to begin doing THIS, and THIS, and THIS, and THIS, and THIS, and THIS,” climate activists need to somehow agree on a small and limited number of practical and achievable “first steps”, in the hope that more people might begin to actually DO at least some of those things.
​
1. Climate activists need to ask the leaders of their groups to begin acting in coordination, rather than in scatter-shot ways.
Those who have the best track records of doing good work, writing good stuff, raising money to continue the fight, working with politicians, or other skills or accomplishments, should form, not just one, but an entire network of Global Warming Strategy Councils, which can find ways to work together, and accomplish more and better things than any single group, by itself, can accomplish. "Climate deniers" and "paid disrupters" benefit from (and actively exploit) the "chatter" created by hundreds of voices, when none of those voices are able to rise above the others. This isn't saying that there should be only one such council, or that they should be able to impose their decisions on others; instead, it is intended to give us, among other things, better ways to identify (and promote, and help) people who can get things done, both in the real world, and "the political world".
​​
2. Rather than allowing crucial facts to be side-stepped, avoided, entangled, and diluted by useless distractions, we need to show discipline, and keep the focus on “macro-facts” (i.e., facts that have global importance, and which will affect everyone).
Those who try to deny that global warming is real, man-made, or truly threatening, will try to weave misleading cherry-picked statistics, unimportant distractions, and even falsehoods, into arguments which will be designed, not to actually prove anything, or actually win arguments, but to create clutter and distractions, with the intent of stalling, delaying, and diluting any effective actions that might help actually reduce the problems we are facing.
However, there are a number of crucial, world-wide, world-changing "macro-facts" that cannot be denied, without resorting to outright lies. The entire first section of this website nominate and summarizes 9 facts, which probably should be whittled down to five or less by groups of committed climate activists (such as the Strategy Councils proposed above), to create a clean, direct, hard-hitting set of "crucial and central facts that every voter should know, before they vote, and every political candidate should expect to be asked about."
Climate-change deniers and "paid disrupters" cannot refute or overcome the "macro-facts" of global warming, so they try to deflect, distract, clutter and complicate the topic, and turn peoples' attention to other, much-less-important, relatively trivial factoids. In the immortal words of Steve Bannon, "Flood the zone with bullsh*t."
Therefore, people who want to explain why global warming is such a huge threat, need to keep pulling and directing attention back to huge, crucial, world-changing "macro-facts", instead of letting the deniers deflect, sidestep, evade, and dance away from the hard truths they don't want people to know, or understand.
There are powerful and even compelling reasons why advertising, marketing, and new-product campaigns are limited to only a small number of carefully-selected facts and goals. Even if they don't fully understand those reasons, and have no desire to get into marketing as a line of work, climate activists need to at least recognize that hard truth, and learn how to use that approach, rather than trying to describe and explain large collections of numerous complex facts, in misguided attempts to show how knowledgeable they are.
​
3. We need to ask and encourage reporters to ask direct and pointed questions, of Republican politicians and officials who (in 2025) helped dismantle the progress we were making toward clean energy.
As just one example of a "pointed question" that can be asked of Republican candidates for Congress, when President Trump announced that he was running for re-election in 2024, he said that global warming threated to raise ocean levels "by an eighth of an inch, in three hundred years". That is utter nonsense, and totally false; more people need to be know the truth, and every Republican candidate should be asked, repeatedly, whether they are willing to disavow that statement, and admit that was fale by a factor of 200-fold, or whether they are willing to simply ignore it and continue acting on bad information. No less an authority than the U.S. Navy began to quietly admit, years ago, that ocean levels had already risen by 8 inches, between 1917 (when a massive rebuilding of our naval bases began) and 2017. And, in September 2025, a semi-official report to the Secretary of Energy (prepared by a group of carefully-selected advisors with long records as "climate deniers") also had to concede the truth that sea levels had risen by 8 inches, in only 100 years (not surprisingly, the DoE report cluttered up that admission with a cloud of distractions, trying to suggest that a mere 8-inch rise, in global sea levels, in only 100 years, wasn't all that important). Therefore, any and all reporters and interviewers should be asked, prepared, and encouraged to: (i) ask Trump (and his minions) whether they are aware of either the Navy reports, or the Department of Energy report; (ii) directly tell them about the "eight inches, in 100 years" facts stated in those reports; and, (iii) ask them to "update" the "eighth of an inch, in 300 years" claim. And then, after Trump sidesteps those questions, ask him those same questions again, until he realizes he will finally need to . . . not "apologize" (he never does, and never will), but simply "update" what he said previously, in light of new information.
​​
4. We need to push Congress to hold hearings on global warming.
There are so many questions, problems, and issues that should be forced out into the open, where everyone can see them – and so many people who should be required to testify, under sworn oath, about what they have done – that that proposal is described in its own section, which can be found HERE.
5. We need to get ready to ask serious and revealing questions that cannot be easily sidestepped or deflected, of any and all candidates for Congress, in the 2026 elections.
By the time someone has gathered enough experience in local or state politics to become a serious candidate for Congress, s/he will have learned how to do things like: (i) sidestep and deflect questions that s/he does NOT want to answer honestly; and, (ii) promise to work for "the middle class", even though at least 90% of his/her "income" will be from wealthy campaign contributors, rather than "the middle class". To help overcome those types of factors, people trying to reduce global warming need to learn how to ask questions that cannot be easily and readily sidestepped, deflected, and evaded, by political candidates. An example of one possible approach to drafting, polishing, and practicing such questions is offered HERE. It is offered as a first draft, in the hope that people working for climate protection might be able to help polish, refine, and improve it, and then actually begin doing it, and improving it still more, after seeing how candidates respond to "the first round".​​
​
​
