Never underestimate the greed and stupidity of humankind.
Banalities aren't really a response
Give me an explanation as to why the bulk of adjustments of past temperature readings were downward adjustments, and why we should believe current climate models when previous climate models have consistently been proven wrong by contemporary adjustments of past temperature readings, and I'll reconsider
Please keep in mind that past models and temperature readings were presented with the same amount of confidence and used in the same bullying fashion - MUH 97%! - despite being inaccurate.
Please keep in mind that from 2012-2014 the "scientific consensus" vociferously denied that there had been no statistically significant warming since 1998. Then, in 2015, the "scientific consensus" grudgingly admitted that yes, the data showed a "pause." Then, in 2016, the NOAA loudly announced that scientists the world over, the best and the brightest experts in the field, had re-examined and revised past temperature data readings because they were allegedly inaccurate, and presto change-o, suddenly a clear warming trend in the data appeared from 1998-2015
Why should current models and readings be trusted, when apparently the earth was cooler in the past than claimed at the time? The data and models then were presented with a level of absolute confidence. Just as they are today. Now, that previous level of absolute confidence is acknowledged to have been misplaced, but that
is handwaved away. Previous is the wrong word, because the same level of absolute confidence is exhibited in the presentation of contemporary computer models and temperature measurements
What happens when, in 15 years, the "consequences" of global warming have still failed to materialize, and the temperature readings being taken today are adjusted downwards, so 2035 can be proclaimed "the hottest year 'ever'"? Are you still going to trust in 97% OF SCIENTISTS AGREE?