The Earth and solar system have been around for millions and millions of years, but they’re basing “global cooling, global warming, climate change” (in that order) on just a few hundred years of data. And Zero says the debate is over?
This is the fundamental flaw in the whole story.
However, I will suggest this. The heat-sink idea....where urban areas, concrete and asphalt, along with massive deforestation in large segments of the world....is likely one of the true issues of existence.
It is a proven fact that after the Panama Canal was completed....weather in the region did change to a fair degree. Statistics over decades has show it’s effect regionally. I think if the environmentalists did their homework and used models right...the heat-sink issue would be the one true issue that is of value, and we could force urban areas to throw up more trees and offer less concrete. But it’s not really a problem which draws redistribution of wealth....which is the fundamental magnet for every single global warming issue.