...
Well my problem here is that as interesting as you links can be, I don't see difference of quality with the sources I can provide.
So please stop just saying that "this source is shit" or prove it. It doesn't help any kind of debate in any way! If you have legitimate doubts on sources I'm providing feel free to expose and explain thos doubts but just saying that what I'm saying is shit because the data I have come from a website which is plain shit isn't exactly what I would call a constructive argument.
I've described as best I can how I have come to think on this issue. This so that others could contemplate my strategies and adopt some of them if they like or if they make sense.
To me, the 'climate change' thing, when viewed from a variety of angles and reasonably well studied, is one of the most obvious scams I've come across yet. It's also probably the most well funded so it is not surpriseing to see it persists. I have not qualms about calling out 'shit sources' in street lingo.
My thesis is that 'climate change' is being used as a Swiss army knife for any project and any other scammers wish. All it takes is for some (not "97%") scientists to bend their ethics under the justification that it's "for a good cause." Upon this foundation the establishment media can build a spectacular looking stage show for the masses. And they have.
For fun:
http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/globalwarming2.html