I would suggest a change to the requirements for Mensa entry, to ask a single question, "Do you believe in man made global warming?". The minority of people who dare to speak up, loudly or in a whisper, and say "I don't think this makes sense", are all those equipped to see beyond the surface, do their own research, and see through many other illusions. It has shaken out the great and the good from all fields- the media, politics, and of course science- all equally qualified but not equally agreed.
This is a standard phenomenon in the world, the majority are wrong as they are not bright enough to understand complex issues, and the ones who are are ridiculed and accused of anything from insanity to paedophilia until the inevitable date they turn out to be correct and everyone forgets about it and moves on. From the heliocentric earth to the cause of stomach ulcers, a few good men have always stood up against the massive world 'consensus', knowing they can't be correct but not always able to prove it. But their innate ability always tells them something feels wrong, and follow it up until they find whatever claims were made were based on inadequate material or misinterpreted to within an inch of its life. These needn't be malicious, just incompetent, but once you challenge them they become malicious as no one likes their work to be attacked and will fight to the death to defend their reputations.
Before the internet the ordinary people had no access to such data, whether on global warming or any other mass delusion, but now everything has been published and we all have free access to the same things as the politicians who take our money to stop something happening which hasn't happened yet, but if it does then their actions will have failed but they would be right, and if not then they would claim a victory as it hadn't happened after all and take the credit, much like the stories of children in Liverpool charging people to watch their cars so nothing will happen to them, borrowed from the more widespread mafia protection rackets, building insurance not to pay for fire damage but to prevent it. So it all boils down to a single scientific issue, not a single political aspect at all, can CO2 (of any origin) raise the temperature to a level where humans and other forms of life suffer more than from the benefits (which are well documented, not from computer models but history). The fact politicians were the ones to take it and run with it (the UN/IPCC are political organisations, not scientific) has soiled it with the filth of politics, but it is irrelevant, the only question is by whichever means it interacts with the atmosphere can all this extra CO2 raise the temperature enough to do more harm than good, nothing else.
Intelligence, being neutral like all power, needs a second positive aspect for the spokespeople to come out in public, ethics. Do people want to be right or popular? This as a result reduces the outspoken many times, as most work for private companies or are retired experts, while most earning a living from the system keep quiet whatever they actually believe, thus skewing the perceived consesus massively. You can no more increase people's ethics than raise their IQ, so those with both will have to work far harder to do the same job, but has turned up people I would offer a Nobel Prize to, and possibly a sainthood. Nigel Lawson, Lord Monckton, James Delingpole, Christopher Booker, the Czech president who is the only world leader who will speak out against it as he says it reminds him of the old Soviet policies, David Bellamy, and a special mention to the LBC presenter Anthony Davis who has studied the data in sufficient detail to bat away callers' nonsense like a pro, and said to me it's not about having a single qualification, but common sense. Not everyone with a high IQ has qualifications, but they all still have the high IQ and ability which goes with it.
In the end, as this is the greatest illusion imposed on mankind since taken up by the UN and sprayed from above like liquid manure worldwide, it is the greatest test to their intelligence. The battles will go on indefinitely, with those in authority using the BBC, mass media and politicians like Obama to do everything possible to keep it going, despite static temperatures, continuing alterations and errors being discovered, and contradictory data. And in the end if you use lateral thinking, such as going from the effect to the cause, CO2 has consistently risen since we started carbon taxes and renewable energy (it's called renewable as they keep earning money from it) meaning these policies don't work. But the fact they simply increase the level of renewables and taxes proves to even those with double figure IQs that if you push a door marked pull even harder it still can't open. They are pouring the same alcohol down the people's throats to cure their alcoholism, and borrowing more money to pay off their debts. And the mass of people without the intelligence are both allowing them and asking them to do it more and faster. God help us all.