I disagree with you only on people having an opinion... all the rest gets my tick.
I'm not qualified in climate science so I read genuine scientific articles from genuine climate scientists to enable me to form an opinion. I also read the alternative views but most of these are polemics designed to ensure they get high readership numbers (click-bait) and rely on agitating over past predictive modelling faux pas.
Predictive modelling is the real problem here. 20 years ago the data was only just being collated and analysed. predictive modelling made some conclusions but the limitations of such modelling were the most important aspects of these. Modelling relies on inputs of factors which influence climate and meteorological events and observations. You can look at a trend line and get better results from a chart than modelling was able to predict.
Do you take a company's predictive modelling as factual or as it is intended - as a guide only. So too with climate modelling. Over-reliance on such leads to disappointment and losses.
