Climate Change Debate

First of all I would like to state that I may sound completely biased in this post because I do believe that climate change is real. Therefore, I found the Friends of Science website both confusing and disturbing. I wish I could say it was shocking, but unfortunately I've seen enough of similar websites to know that they exists. Yet it is very confusing, I noticed how everyone of their main points included a graph, because a graph somehow adds legitimacy, but I found those graphs so hard to follow that for most of them I just gave up trying to. I also noticed that they used climate change and global warming interchangeable, which they're not. I liked that they were upfront with their message and mission statement, I've seen organizations that try to trick people into thinking they're pro-environment but I like that FoS are upfront in saying they're against the Kyoto protocol and their goal is to make a mockery of it. But I am slightly upset that I cannot find a page of their partners or major sponsors. They are a non-profit organization but most still have a page that list their biggest sponsors and I think that's something very important to look at when informing yourself.
How to Talk to a Climate Skeptic is a website that I have much more respect for. Although there is still a lack of information about who funds the project, I feel like overall its a much more clear and supported argument. I like the way that its broken down into arguments and counter-arguments and I think the author given adequate support for his statements. Flipping through some of the debates I see he has either quoted or linked highly esteemed scientific organizations as part of his proof, i think that's extremely smart. Of the two I think this is the more convincing site.
I think the debate around climate change right now stems around the politics. Climate change will involve a great deal of money, money that people are ready to give up right now because they don't feel like climate change is an eminent threat. To protect this you will see a like of data falsification and austro-turfing, it is the job of the public to sift through and decide what they think is correct. I think the first thing to do when looking at these websites is to determine their mission statements and goal, often their listed but sometimes you need to determine them for yourself. Then it is extremely important to find out who is funding them, because the information will be swayed in a way in which they're supporters want, so if an oil company is funding a group that says climate change doesn't exist that should be a red flag. The next step is to sort through the data and come to your own opinion if it makes sense and you agree with it. It's a long process but its worth it to be informed.