If the belief ratio of the scientific community was 60/40 or 70/30, then its fair to be sceptical. But its an overwhelming majority based on overwhelming tests over a long period of time. Ice cores, old atmosphere, water, its been tested to the hilt. And while there is a lot of unknowns with climate knowledge, there is massive data that pints right back to the Industrial Revolution and since then. Overwhelming evidence is quite likely a conservative view.
The sad thing is little is talked about what we need to do, and how we need to do it. As right now, the money side of using existing FF and not investing in green energy very much is cheaper.
See, this is the thing... You're right there is a lot of unknowns with climate knowledge, and no amount of juggling the percentages of who believes or disbelieves these unknowns is going to change that salient fact.
As to what we need to do, what do you think of the global carbon credits market? Can you figure out how polluters buying carbon credits to allow them to keep polluting solves the pollution problems they're responsible for?
Trading carbon credits:
What is the carbon trading?
The carbon trade also refers to the ability of individual companies to trade polluting rights through a regulatory system known as cap and trade. Companies that pollute less can sell their unused pollution rights to companies that pollute more.
Carbon credits add a visible entry on the balance sheet and qualifies a cost for pollution. The aim is that the cost of credits out weighs the cost of reducing emissions. This provides an additional incentive to reduce overall emissions.