I stipulate peer reviewed evidence for man made climate doom to adhere to the self imposed rules you people hide behind even though peer review is no guarantor of veracity and in matters climate is best described as "pal review"
To illustrate the point your first port of call here was to invoke peer review ergo the fact you cannot provide a non computer modelled peer reviewed paper in support of your belief immediately destroys your bluster using your own criteria. It is not a case of choosing to believe in or not believe in peer review but an unassailable way of watching you people hang from your own petard.
As for your insults that is par for the course when the prickly subject of robust observational evidence is raised you're not the first and certainly won't be the last so I will just treat it with the contempt it deserves
NASA amended and changed models via exploratory space voyages until they were right only then did they head for the moon with humans on board the issue with climate models is they are still in the R&D stage miles off "take off" yet global policy, the equivalent of "take off", blunders on. It is a monstrous folly
Oh Baz. Fair play to you for posting still