I actually agree with you more than you think. There are folks out there who do a terrible job communicating data and they let political bias form their motivation. However--and again--just because the severity of any given problem isn't as imminent or obvious as some folks will try to claim, it doesn't mean there isn't a problem. Hypothetically, please humor me and concede for a minute that there IS a manmade macro effect to global climate patterns, but that it is MUCH more subtle than many think. For example, let's say the demise of earth is 500 years away instead of within the next decade or two as some claim. What is the appropriate response? Do nothing because we will figure it out later? Do nothing because it won't be our problem? If you genuinely believe (without simply letting political motivation drive your opinion) that there is zero effect and it is all BS, then that is fine. But it would be irresponsible--and frankly immoral--for those who have a genuine basis to believe human activity will result in the loss of property and life to not sound the alarm and push for reasonable mitigation practices based on available data. However, we live in a black and white mindset society, so "doom and gloom" and "no problem" are the loudest sides of the discussion.