You're not listening, and that is part of the problem. We cannot have discussions, because the politics have polarized us. I'm not arguing that the earth isn't

You're not listening, and that is part of the problem. We cannot have discussions, because the politics have polarized us. I'm not arguing that the earth isn't warming. I'm not arguing that humans aren't involved. I'm saying that there is a detrimental feedback loop between politics and science. This feedback loop means that we can't have reasonable discussions. Dismissing dissenting views as "climate change deniers" is a problem for science. And FWIW, though I'm a nobody, I have had private dinners with people who are somebodies (also, I respect that I'm an anonymous user on the internet which definitely helps my credibility - but I'll try anyway) - the people who have written IPCC reports and been in climate science research for decades. They share the opinions that I'm expressing, but dare not say them because they need grants; it's a delicate balance. The political feedback loop is a problem. It gets in the way of good science. Using predictive models can give us insight, but nature is pretty good at making fools of humans, and it's arrogant to believe that we can predict the future of something like the weather given the nature of the problem - we can't run controlled experiments, the data is super noisy and difficult to wrangle, and