I understand your frustration but comparing the opinions of nutritionists to the physics of climate science is absurd. The evidence that global warming is caused by human activity is overwhelming and the science involved is across the board, from general predictions going back to the late 19th C., to rigorous mathematical predictions over the last sixty years that consistently give good matches to the measured effects. It's not as if it's just a few people out there phoning in what they see on their thermometers. There is a vast body of interlocking evidence from thousands of different kinds of studies measuring and correlating the chemical, physical, and thermal changes. Honestly, at this point, skepticism that it's real is a bit like flat earth. The knowledge isn't perfect and never will be because the number of variables is astronomical and it is physically impossible to measure the chemistry and temperature of every CC of air in and water on earth. But no reasonable scientist seriously doubts the overall principle, and the predictions going back to the early seventies have one thing in common: they have almost universally been too conservative. My parents were both scientists, and I remember many conversations in the late 1960's about this, decades before it became part of the culture wars. It was called "the greenhouse effect" back then and it was regarded as being establish beyond reasonable doubt even then. For heaven's sake--it's been broadly understood since 1885! How much convincing will it take?