If you can't completely prove your theory, how do you get everyone to accept and comply with it?
No theory of the natural sciences can be "proven". Scientists are convinced to accept theories that are never falsified and which satisfy the tests of the scientific method. That is why an enormous majority of climate scientists and scientists in general accept anthropogenic warming..
You BAN any opposition or any alternate theory, of course!
There are many discredited theories that were once accepted. Choosing not to teach them in public schools is not the same thing as "banning" them. Choosing to call this "banning" is an obvious attempt to cast yourself and your views as victims. That, I'm afraid, is pure bullshit.. If you and your ideas cannot pass scientific muster, their rejection by the scientific community and by those who pick our children's science curriculum is right and proper. Save in some elective course on science history, I would not want my children's time and intellect wasted by some fool telling them that the flat Earth, the demon theory of disease and the practice of choosing food by it's makeup of earth, fire, air and water are viable alternatives to modern theories covering the same topics. Neither the argument that the world is getting warmer due to some "natural" cause nor that it is not getting warmer at all but the world's climate scientists are lying about it are viable assertions.
Obama and his DOJ have already begun looking into how they can criminalize any opposition to Global Warming
No, they have not and you're a fool to believe that's the case. The Justice Department is investigating the violations of Exxon/Mobil and others in the fossil fuel industry (violations to which Exxon Mobil has already admitted) that they have been conducting a massive disinformation campaign to convince fools such as yourself (eponymous evidence) that there is some great controversy among scientists as to whether or not the conclusions of the IPCC (and the thousands of scientists studies on which those conclusions are based) are correct. This is PRECISELY what happened with Big Tobacco and Intelligent Design: the manufacture of a non-existent controversy in an attempt to hold back science's revelation of a hazard by the people who profit from the sale of that hazard.
