I undoubtedly agree with both your conclusion and RC's Gavin's. What I mean is better summarised by

knowledge about science is not binary – science isn’t either settled or not settled. This is a false and misleading dichotomy. Instead, we know things with varying degrees of confidence

. This is what I mean with "science never stops debating." I know that scientists nowadays grasp pretty well basics of AGW, I trust their work and anyway I'd be in no position to deny this since I am not an expert.

Not really, science never stops "debating".