This is plain wrong. And your recourses to vague 'insults' and 'name-calling' is just bullshit - that's not how science works, or how the world works, believe it or not. Can you actually provide credible links of credible scientists doing what u're claiming?

Global warming - which everyone except the politically motivated accept - because it's overwhelming is what I assume is your 'weird beef' with science is... just as evolution everyone except the religiously motivated accept

The whole point of scientific evidence is that it's evidence. Experts - REAL experts, who are already the best of their field, who struggled to get to where they are, who earnt qualifications to study make deductions and predictions and analysis that most people don't have the time to spend that much time investing time in. And what happens? They get ignored or brushed over by peasants stuffing their faces with cheese puffs and 5-minute youtube clips and some fake news and decided the CIA got NASA to fake climate change and vaccinations, a kind of backward 'intellgience' formed by a inflated

I've not clicked on your site but the fact you are already 'weeding out' (harvesting out articles you don't like is simply called 'cherry picking' btw. - it;s a sign of junk )

Rank your pieces by study-size, credentials of the place that produced them and . Establishments prize themselves on their reputations,

And for your englihtenment, because you really need it, the way to get a true sense of any subject is to look at both sides completely independently, consider both arguments as right, consider both as wrong, look at evidence and consider these all together and from here get a sense of where you think the truth lies. Then re-evaluate, and keep repeating this until you settle into a place you feel comfortable with.

You don't just come out fresh from an informative-youtube you watched for 10 minutes with cake crumbs still on your trousers and decide you know the answer and start deleting documents that don't fit what "you already know".

With climate change there reaslly isn't much of 2 camps. There's the majority who just observe data and don't really have too much difference either way, who overwhelmingly say it's a real thing.

Let's just say 'NASA' - if you're going to discount them, there's no point even talking to you. They're a space agency that burn Rocket Fuel for a living. They have a terrible carbon footprint. They have zero 'game' in climate change. They constantly measure and analyse because their profession, space travel and observance requires it, they don't come from any 'political' motivation - https://climate.nasa.gov/causes/