Based on empirical data, the world will need more CO2 in the future, not less. Increasing CO2 increases plants water use efficiency and allows more crop production with less water. To feed everyone in the future, we will need higher CO2 levels. And, there is no real evidence that CO2 increases global temperatures (Some models, but they are someone's guess). Your government is promoting the exact opposite of what needs to be done. Your government is using this as a way to get you to submit to their desires and implement "Satans New World Order". I will debate anyone who is serious and has been studying the issue for at least a couple of decades. The University/industry/government complex is controlling this information the same way they have controlled the information on Covid-19, by removing those who speak out against their fraud. I have spoken out at my University and they removed me from my professorship. (At my age, who cares; lol)
@AmagingGrace Just for the sake of argument, assuming that the models that predict increasing temperature are correct, what does that do for the amount of available farmland on Earth? Would that be a net loss or net gain of farming territory? If all of that was true, it seems like many colder climates (Canada and Russia come to mind of course) would suddenly have much more viable farm land, and might more than make up for some currently hot territories suddenly being too hot to grow crops successfully.
In the long run, I think it would increase the overall amount of farmland, especially if it were caused by elevated CO2 (It isn't, but for this thought exercise we can pretend). However, warming and cooling are happening simulaneously, but in a geographically scattered patterned. In over 100 sites across the western US, we found a random occurance of warming and cooling, but those statically detectable changes were fairly rare, and likely oscillate around some wide mean. I am just saying the advancement of warming or cooling is not linear in space or time.