Hello punkofnice, I noticed you said "10 renowned scientists say a thing is 'so'. Another 10 renowned scientists say it 'isn't so'. Who do you believe?" I believe that the climate scientists who say human caused climate change is real are correct in saying such. I believe that because of the following.
The information I read regarding the percentage of climate scientists who are convinced that human caused climate change is real is not anything like 50% pro and 50% con. It is 97% (or more) of them being convinced it is real. It is thus not at all a hard decision for me to make as to whether I should believe the view of the nay saying climate scientists instead of the scientists who say it is real. Furthermore, I am persuaded by the evidence and reasoning which I have read and listened to by scientists who are convinced that climate change is real and that is being caused by human activity.
For evidence of the very high percentage of climate scientists who are convinced that human caused climate is for real consider the following at https://climate.nasa.gov/faq/17/do-scientists-agree-on-climate-change/ .
"Do scientists agree on climate change?
Yes, the vast majority of actively publishing climate scientists – 97 percent – agree that humans are causing global warming and climate change. Most of the leading science organizations around the world have issued public statements expressing this, including international and U.S. science academies, the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, and a whole host of reputable scientific bodies around the world."Consider also that https://news.cornell.edu/stories/2021/10/more-999-studies-agree-humans-caused-climate-change says the following regarding those who are experts about climate change.
"More than 99.9% of peer-reviewed scientific papers agree that climate change is mainly caused by humans, according to a new survey of 88,125 climate-related studies.
The research updates a similar 2013 paper revealing that 97% of studies published between 1991 and 2012 supported the idea that human activities are altering Earth’s climate."Why should either of us disbelieve that the virtually unanimous view of climate scientists, ones who published peer-reviewed scientific papers on climate change? It is not anything like deciding between 10 renowned scientists on side of the issue versus 10 renowned scientists on the opposite of the issue. Yet sadly (from my point of view) the article says the following is the case among the general public, despite the now virtually unanimous view of climate scientists.
"In spite of such results, public opinion polls as well as opinions of politicians and public representatives point to false beliefs and claims that a significant debate still exists among scientists over the true cause of climate change. In 2016, the Pew Research Center found that only 27% of U.S. adults believe that “almost all” scientists agreed that climate change is due to human activity, according to the paper."
Perhaps since NASA and Cornell University are located in the USA, and since you are in the UK, you don't trust what they said in the words I quoted above. Very well, consider what ESA (European Space Agency) says at https://climate.esa.int/en/ . There it says "Scientific evidence for warming of the climate is unequivocal (IPCC Fifth Assessment Report, 2013)". Furthermore, at https://climate.esa.int/en/evidence/what-is-climate-and-climate-change/ it says the following.
'Over the last 800,000 years, concentrations of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere have fluctuated in response to glacial and interglacial periods, but have not exceeded 300 ppm. In the last century, however, due to industrialisation and fossil fuel combustion, carbon dioxide concentrations have increased at an unprecedented rate, and now exceed 400 ppm.
The Earth's climate is warming due to increasing concentrations of carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases in the atmosphere. The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change concludes in its Special Report: Global Warming of 1.5°C, that “Human-induced warming reached approximately 1°C (above pre-industrial levels) in 2017, increasing at around 0.2°C per decade”. The amounts of snow and ice on the planet have diminished, and sea level rise is accelerating (WMO Statement on the State of the Global Climate, 2019).'
See also the chart at the chart (at https://climate.esa.int/en/evidence/what-is-climate-and-climate-change/ ) which pertains to the above quoted two paragraphs.
Furthermore,it is not just NASA and ESA which are convinced that climate change is a problem. Numerous member nations of the United Nations also recognize it. Notice that the above article of ESA also says the following. "To tackle climate change, countries have agreed under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change to stabilise greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere at a level that prevents dangerous interference with the climate system."
I notice you also said the following. "I was taught Evolution. Is that true? Should they have taught Creation? Islam?" My answer is that Evolution is true. I thought you also believe in evolution since I thought you are now an atheist (or agnostic), but perhaps I was mistaken by having that idea about you.
Both cosmological evolution and biological evolution (including human evolution) happened. Creation (in the since of Creationism) should not be taught in a science class in a secular school, except that it is appropriate that make a brief description of it in a science textbook so that the evolution can be compared to it. I have some secular science textbooks on biology and historical geology which do such. Islam, or any other religion, should not be taught in a science class in a secular school except as part of course in sociology (in which various religions are compared) and as part of a course of social anthropology (in a segment about comparative religion). I have secular college textbooks which do so. Religion can also be taught in passing in history courses as it relates the historical events.
I notice you said the following. "Now. what are your thoughts on Evolution being taught at my school back in the 1970's?" I believe that was a good thing. Evolution was taught in the textbook of a required 1 quarter (one fourth of one school year) biology course in my high school in the US when I took the course in the early 1980s (but at the end of the course I got the impression that by biology teacher believed in creationism). I wish I had been permitted to take that textbook home to study it at home, because if I had I might would believed in evolution back then and thus might not would have got baptized. [I got baptized about 1 year after I took the course - my physics teacher and my chemistry made a joint statement to a science class of mine saying that they determined that evolution is false.]
I plan to discuss some of your other comments after Thursday, since I will have much more free time from Friday through Sunday (since I don't work on those days). Right now it is well past my bed time and I need to get some sleep before i go to work tomorrow.