After I wiped my tears from LAUGHING so hard I decided to read this fine article and so I put a condom on my internet connection and clicked on your link.

First thing... I just gotta point this out. The article says "hundreds of scientists"... that's not 100% of scientists. So, how many hundreds? Well, Three. There were 300 scientists, at least that's what the Washington Examiner says, which is what your source is sourcing. 300 hundred seems about the normal number of geologists commissioned by the carbon industry to protect the illusion that carbon emissions are good for us.

The report was apparently handed to Presidential Clown by the anti-environmentalist that he put in charge of the EPA. Only the stupidest morons on the planet can't see past this bullshit. It's not even a compelling report, in fact from what's been reported by your source, there's no indication that it even makes any sense.

The report says CO2 is not pollution. Well, that all depends on what you're calling pollution. They said CO2 is a beneficial gas that helps plants grow. Well yeah... So? Is this the strategy now? Revert to grade school science and remind ourselves that plants consume CO2? I guess if you stop there everything becomes stupid-simple and I guess they feel more confident since Trump was elected that stupid-simple is all they need. Our industry produces CO2 and that makes trees happy. The End. :)

Never mind the fact that the planet had plenty of carbon dioxide without our factories. Never mind the fact that CO2 is also a greenhouse gas that traps heat, so while it might be good for plants at one level, too much of it will trap too much heat and cause bigger problems on another level. Never mind the fact that CO2 is only a part of what our industry emits anyway. Along with the CO2, industry is also tossing up a whole range of heavy metals and toxic compounds that claim more American lives per year than all the American lives that were EVER lost to Muslim terrorists. But that's just the story of pollution, which as you know, doesn't sell... (probably because the deaths are slow and boring). But global warming (and the climate changes that it causes) is another problem; one that CO2 plays a bigger role in and also presents a more dramatic end.

So a few clever people make it there business to fool the public into thinking a step-back from Paris is based on good sense. They appeal to a level of education they know will resonate with the dumb-ass population that they've learned to bet on for things like electing a demagogue like Trump, so fifth-grade. Basic science... trees consume CO2 and produce O. That's it - keep it stupid-simple.

It's just a little embarrassing that as the U.S. turns away from the table at which every other country in the world is sitting... it won't be just because the U.S. government is too weak to stand up to industry, but because they actually convinced the American people that their pollution is good for trees.

Insult to injury.

eagle... the author is L. Frank Baum who published the story as an allegory for the political and social situation in the 1890s. It's a well known topic of discussion... the political interpretations of the Wizard of Oz. From what I remember, the story revolves around the fight for a bimetal standard (gold AND silver). The perspective is set in Kansas where farmers were loosing their shirts to drought and plague. Many of them were angry with the bankers that seemed to be profiting from their losses. The idea was that allowing the coinage of silver would increase the money supply and make it easier for farmers to pay off their debts. The idea was championed by a populist movement at the time and that was being reported in the papers as a political tornado. As you know, populists always love a tornado.

One more thing... in the original story, Dorthy had silver slippers not ruby ones... The movie studio was experimenting with technicolor and decided ruby slippers would pop out better, but L. Frank Baum had her in silver slippers, dancing along a gold brick road. There's your bimetal currency... To where? Why, to the Emerald City... The banks back east that have all the gold (measured in ounces... as in "OZ") on which to issue money.

Tin Man was the factory worker (hard labor = no heart left), the Scarecrow was the farmer (no brains = reference to how they kept getting screwed by the bankers), the Lion was the politician (without the guts to stand up for... the little people)

L. Frank Baum wrote the story in the late 1890s. This was when the government was just starting to experiment with progressive systems on very small scale. So, it's highly unlikely that the story is a description of such wide-spread progressive culture. Populism maybe, capitalism of course, but progressive politics? Nah.