> Plants-life thrive off of CO2, contrary to what the propaganda has taught people to believe.

I don't know what propaganda you have been consuming, but mine hasn't tried to convince me that I am a plant yet.

That's a straw man argument, right?

Maybe? I wouldn't say there was any straw man argument here honestly. More just that they misunderstand issues regarding climate change. They think that people are saying that climate change is causing deforestation, and arguing against that. That's pretty easy to confuse with what people are actually trying to raise awareness of, which is that deforestation is leading to climate change (those same plants that thrive off the additional CO2 in the atmosphere can't do so if the additional CO2 in the atmosphere is there because they're already dead before they can take it out of the atmosphere).

Yes, plants grows massively faster with higher CO2, plants has been CO2 starved for millions of years now but add it in labs and you can see plants growing more than 100% faster.

Probably the reason we see less mineral density in crops today, CO2 levels has risen so they grow faster but mineral supply is the same. So probably not very beneficial, we aren't lacking in plant calories as is.

Re: "Probably the reason we see less mineral density in crops today"

I thought that's primarily because monocrops are quick to strip minerals from the land, as they leave with the food that's harvested?

But human life doesn’t.

Note: Deforestation continues at a record pace in tropical areas, which leads to less trees and plants to consume the CO2. The exact parts of the planet that should be thriving is being turned into cattle pastures.

The other big sink for CO2 is the ocean, which does not thrive on CO2. CO2 in water turns the water more acidic, which affects the base of the food chain.

There's no propaganda that suggests that plants don't thrive in CO2.

This isn't "Woke Mind Virus", it's just Corporate Pandering. Apple has a huge PR problem with their factories in China, and they've determined that it's cheaper to "Be Green" than to fix their supply chain or move manufacturing back to the US. Their moves towards being green aren't "Bad", but they wouldn't be doing it if they didn't have to create PR to paper over the things they're doing that are actually Bad.

And this is just the iceberg for the beginning of conversation.

No one cares to watch the experts presented that aren't on the "CO2 is evil" bandwagon, nor then actually spending the time to counter their many arguments of these complex issues.

I don't understand yet why no one has created a "Wikipedia" for various organizations to list and offer their counter-argument for the 1000s of different talking points, so then everyone can view them in a matrix/table format - not only for the climate issue and climate alarmism, but for other complex issues such as the Israel-Palestine "conflict".

P.S. There's no life in the ocean that grows from CO2, and that then fish et al eat?

"Through photosynthesis, phytoplankton consume carbon dioxide on a scale equivalent to forests and other land plants."

"There are a billion billion billion phytoplankton in the world's oceans—more than there are stars in the sky. Phytoplankton are hugely diverse, with likely 100 thousand different species."