It is accepted that 97 percent of scientists believe that man-caused global warming is an established fact. What this means is “end of discussion."
Yet there are unanswered questions. Who are these scientists? This figure comes from a review of published literature and not an actual survey of these scientists. There are many other eminently qualified scientists who do not support this premise and went on record. Why has much of this research not been peer reviewed and linked to government grants that promotes a certain conclusion?
Future prediction of climate is based on computer models. How were these models constructed? I used a computer model to predict fireline intensity for wildfires for years before I learned that the model was designed in the laboratory and not the real world. As a result the predicted results could be off by a huge factor.
Another question — what was the mechanism that caused the ice sheet that was over a mile thick and covered most of Canada and much of northern U.S. to retreat to the arctic before the advent of cities, factories and cars? What is behind the shrinking Martian ice caps? What about the historical information about the mini-ice age and warming intervals when Greenland was farmed and Newfoundland was called Vinland? What about the climategate scandal where evidence of recent global cooling was hidden?
I see evidence of the effects of warming. I visited the Mendenhall Glacier in Juneau and it has definitely retreated since the 1930s. But man-caused? If global warming will bring on the catastrophe we are told then it is ridiculous to spend money on measures that may reduce temperatures world-wide by 10 degrees Celsius and spend it rather on mitigating measures like higher sea walls, relocation out of critical seacoast areas, etc.