TimG, you're not a scientist. You have no expertise. You have no knowledge of climatology.
Most of climate science is statistical analysis. The notion that only members of a self appointed club are capable of looking at the issues and developing an informed opinion is pathetic nonsense. There are a lot of people in the world who are more than qualified to comment on climate science and most don't work in the field. Note that almost all major scientific breakthroughs prior to 1900 were made by self taught amateurs. Rejecting opinions without investigation because they don't come from self appointed gatekeepers is a recipe for ignorance.
You should get your PhD and refute the common understanding of climate change using the scientific method.
More pathetic appeals to authority. My problem with climate science as a field is it has abandoned any pretense of impartiality and active promotes political causes. Climate scientists have said on a number of occasions that they will suppress results that don't fit the narrative because they don't want to give ammunition to political opponents. This attitude means nothing they say can be trusted which, in turn, means there are no authorities qualified to speak on climate issues.
I realize that global warming zealots are willful blind the group think in climate science because climate scientists say what they want to here. But the fact that you are blind does not mean it is not a big problem and more importantly, you have no business telling me that I should place my trust in a bunch of left wing zealots pretending to be scientists just because you say I should.