“…scientists have to reconcile their theories with raw data”.
Rick Fischer
21

Yes, all they have for climate change is 6,500 centuries of precedent;

Also: temperature changes, receding glaciers, etc.

If you still think that this is not a worrying trend for continued existence of humans on this planet, then I’m sorry but you do not have the support of evidence.

There will always be contrary data, but you have to trust scientific consensus, it is biased sometimes but it is biased less often on average than members of the non-scientific community, myself included. This is not a situation where all sides are equally justified, there is a side that is much, much more likely to be correct, and that is the side who’s job it is to understand the problem at hand.

It is the same with brexit, the economists may be completely wrong, the economy may still do better than it would have but economists say that this is less likely than the economy doing worse. Ultimately, backing brexit is having the inability for self-examination to say that you understand the economy better than economists. Yes, sometimes the economists get it wrong, and when they do the results can be disastrous, but that is the exception that we notice far more readily than the rule.