[Tinordi]

Because anybody that is a reasonable must also be skeptical or open to reason from all sides of an argument by definition. I look at the politicization of the climate change movement as more a social issue than a scientific proof. People and societies are chronically guilty of being short-sighted and when you look at the longer timescale, the period of anthropogenic (man-made) global warming is a mere blip on the history of the earth.

So you're saying that because the Earth is so old and weathered that humans could possibly have an effect on its systems?

We know that the temperatures on earth have swung widely from colder to warmer, many instances even recorded during the recorded history of civilization with plenty more scientific evidence showing such periods in prehistory.

We also know that we've never seen this rate of change in temperature before using at least 3 completely different datasets. So if you believe the historical record of climate why are you dismissing its biggest contribution to the field?

I think changes in climate are mostly out of our control and due to solar activity.

What makes you think that? There's basically no shred of evidence to it.