The problem is for every pro-study I can find, there is a con-study to match it. Another problem is that the predicted events do not seem to be happening:
https://www.globalresearch.ca/global-cooling-is-here/10783
It all reminds me of the 'cigarettes causes cancer' debate. Everytime one scientist released a study saying yes, another one released a study saying no. It was not until that whistleblower infiltrated the Tobacco Companies, and released that damning evidence, the question was laid to rest.
there has been similar evidence of corruption by oil companies, etc, but it hasn't made as much of a splash. Because "this must be fake news" or some other conspiracy.
and so you are reduced to returning to basic facts like "as green house gases even real?" and "if you increase the presence of a green house gas 33% in the atmosphere 33%, will it have any effect?" and so on.
that would require going back to the original science fundamentals
what are the basics we know are true before the BS began?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_climate_change_science
https://www.americanscientist.org/article/carbon-dioxide-and-the-climate