Referring to the endless amounts of various articles layered on social media’s, books, scientific papers and studies by experts and others in the field, most have dedicated their entire livelihood to understand truly what is going on and find a means of understanding, surely it makes sense to take a stand point of neutrality would it not? As all what is being said cannot be entirely false, I believe there are levels of ignorance and ego which are blocking the way towards true understanding.
Discussion
It is actually false hood to believe that most scientists believe in the man made co2 and cow farts cause climate change hypothesis.
The majority of scientific papers, 66% of them in fact took no position on the support for the hypothesis in this survey. However, 33% of papers supported at least a weak human contribution to global warming and they decided to divide that by 34% remaining papers to get 97% of climate scientists believe in human caused climate change.
Also, this is not science at all. The classical logical fallacy of appealing to authority rather than addressing what than debating the scientific evidence.
But I agree with you we should take a rational and neutral perspective so we dont take any rash decisions that could potentially impact our standard of living/well being.
I’m not downplaying the natural occurrence of co2 contribution by nature, but what is evidently clear is a divide between what is factual and what is not, we could go back and forth all night at proven scientific evidence of both scenarios and still have no clear answers, and yet both sides have SOLID evidence, I would even say that the side that sways towards human contribution is more clear and factual, maybe due to superior funding but still the point stands, simply denying climate change could then be seen as irrational and reckless.
Nobody is denying climate change. The climate change has always changed for millions of years and co2 levels are historically low on average according to the ice core samples from all over the world. Also, CO2 temperatures of lag behind global temperatures not lead historically.
There have been warming periods like in ancient Roman era (time of Jesus) and Viking era period (900-1300 AD) where temperatures were much warmer than they are now. What caused the global warming then the romans and Viking didn’t we’re not burning fossil fuels?
Co2 is the gas of life below 200 ppm plants begin to die. We are currently at 412 ppm co2 concentration. Plants grow optimally at 1500 ppm co2 level concentrations. If anything we should be burning more fossil fuels so we can help green the earth and help feed the growing population.
Look man made claims change is real we have geo-engineering programmes. That nobody knows what the long term effects of by spray heavy metals in the sky.
But this carbon footprint and cows fart cause catastrophe climate change hypothesis is beyond ridiculous to the ration mind.
There is no evidence of carbon dioxide causing global temperatures to rise. Yes they are correlated by correlation doesn’t prove causation.
What’s funny is that global temperatures have been cooling in the last several years according to satellite data from university of Alabama. The Antarctica just recorded its coldest ever temperature since satellite recordings began despite all this rising carbon footprint in last 100 years and growing global population.
https://electroverse.info/earths-lowest-temp-since-2017-record-cold-europe-southern-hemp-freezes/
#climatescam 
At this point with all the "science and reports" that have been refferenced as fact ...have turned out to be not so factful...much like the whole recycle , reuse fiasco that just exported trash to poor countries.