Expanding the astronomical inputs for climate

http://www.cbc.ca/news/technology/st...ion-haida.html

1 - Uranus has a polar climate due to its inclination close to 90
degrees from its ecliptic axis

2 - A planet with zero inclination where its daily rotational axis
aligns with its ecliptic axis has an equatorial climate as the
seasonal fluctuations in daylight/darkness asymmetries would be
minimal.

3 The Earth has a largely equatorial climate with a minor polar
input.

The older perspective of 'no tilt/no seasons' must yield to the proper
perspective where zero degree inclination reflects a pure equatorial
climate as ,in planetary terms,the terrestrial effects of a polar
climate such as that of Uranus can be set off against the Earth's
largely equatorial climate. This dangerous situation where people are
taking unilateral action based on nothing more than a belief that
humans can control the planet's temperature is entirely due to the
lack of astronomers .
The inability to accept the explanation for the seasons as a
consequence of two rotations to the central Sun is presently more
important than this reckless situation where real damage is done by
empirical modelers.

How do any of you do it !,the real crisis is that those who are paid
to be astronomers refuse to accept that all the terrestrial effects
within a 24 hour day keep in step with the daily rotation of the Earth
and considering this is the most immediate experience between
planetary dynamics and temperature fluctuations,the hostility towards
this fact is truly shocking at a level of a holocaust.