Who is more cautious?

   I didn't say there was no climate change.  I said your sources did not show evidence for their claims.  There is a difference.  I suppose there might be other sources somewhere that show data connected to their conclusions.  I just have not been shown those, by you or anyone else.

   If you repeat bad science that you incorrectly believe supports climate change, what is the result?  The result is that you erode belief in science among otherwise intelligent people.  Is that what you want to do?  Suppose instead you really would rather bolster support for science.  How do you do that?  You keep your stupid mouth shut.  That's how.  Else wait till you can make a case using data that leads to your findings.

   Now do you understand why it doesn't matter whether idiots such as yourself "believe" in science?  It doesn't matter what you believe.  It only matters what you can show.