Seth Miller helps us to grasp how climate science's claim that CO2 causes Climate Change makes sense. In the end it comes down to "good old human judgement". When faced with push back from the tobacco industry against medical evidence that smoking caused cancer, Bradford Hill created nine criteria by which to evaluate causal claims in epidemiology. They are useful to clarify climate change discussions for non-scientists.
When placed in Hill’s criteria, the strong points and weak points of the argument leap out.
If you believe alternatives to human-caused global warming, test them in this structure. See if the story holds.
The fact that we rely on stories to judge the legitimacy of an idea may strike some as lacking scientific rigor. So be it.
The evidence supporting man-made global warming creates the one of strongest science stories I have ever seen.