Puzzled by climate change arguments? Me too.

Opinions are valuable things. But I think it's equally valuable to know when your opinion is supported by facts or not.

That's why the arguments around climate change continue to puzzle me. 

It puzzles me that when over 90% of climate change scientist are in agreement over the impact of human activity on the climate, the CC sceptics think they know more than the scientists. I'll bet if 9 out of 10 cancer specialists said the sceptics had cancer but it was treatable, they wouldn't be listening to the 10% who said there was no problem. They'd be moving heaven and earth to get going on their treatment (presuming they could afford it - lets not go there at the moment....)

A lawyer friend of mine always says "don't second guess your consultants" - sure, you might still get it wrong, but you could at least hope you'd gotten to your position through some expert means. It seems to me that most climate change sceptics/deniers got to their position simply because the other view is inconvenient. 

Further to this, our new (allegedly pro-market) government wants to lead the world as the first to repeal (arguably market based) CC legislation in favour of a non- market solution (which apparently no-one thinks will work). 

Puzzling indeed.