So who would you listen to? What would it take?
Anyone who can fully understand the greater part of the climatic system. That person might show up in a couple of centuries.
Oh, by the way -- why are the global warming people rebranding themselves as "climate change"? Is it, perhaps, because the globe isn't warming?
I couldn't find a simple answer for that but I'll give you my guess. The idea of warming is too simple. It sounds like every spot equally is going to get warmer by a few degrees. That's not the prediction.
Not a few years ago. The prediction was warming, and it was called global warming. It included sea level rise and the "smoking hot spot" 10km up in the atmosphere. Neither of those have occurred, nor has overall warming over the last decade. What predictions have come true? Just name a few.
Instead, some places will get drier (and get droughts) while other places will get wetter (and get floods). Some storms will probably become more violent (because storms are fueled by heat) and some of these storms may actually bring a lot of rain or snow making people feel colder. Lastly, there are some thoughts that climate change will switch off some important ocean currents which bring warm water to the likes of Britain and Northern Europe - which would make them a lot colder.
The term climate change is a nice catch-all to describe how the climate will change - and not simply become warmer.
If you could point to a large number of predictions that have come true without significant numbers that haven't come true, then it would mean something. Until then, you are blowing hot air.
(On a slightly more personal note, I'd suggest that your question indicates that you are not all that familiar with the predictions of climate change - which makes me think that you haven't researched the subject sufficiently to be able to rebut it well. This does not speak well for your position.)
Do mean on a slightly more ad-hominem note? 8-) Well, I will return the favor.
I am not a climate change expert. Neither is Al Gore. But I can read the words of the scientists that signed the Inhofe petition. And the proceedings of the American Institute for Economic Research conference on Global Warming.
Where's the beef? Whare is the hot spot in the atmosphere 10km above the tropics? Where is the overall global warming trend over the last decade? Where is the predicted sea level rise?
It is clear to me that anyone talking down from a mountaintop like you are, as if the science is settled, is not someone to listen to. There are plenty of reputable people of great stature, including William Gray and John Theon, who are not believers in AGW. Most of what I see from AGW proponents is appeals to authority and gobbledy-gook that tries to explain why the small percentage of CO2 that humans create is the most important percentage.