What it is clear to me is that you are also wrong in assuming that I’m also an alarmist.
The point I constantly make is that one has to look at what experts and the evidence and the climate scientists agree to so we can make better decisions, and it is clear also with this example that we can not rely on popular media.
Just concluding that there is only a message of doom is not the whole reality, of course there are some that press on alarmism, and I’m also on the record of shooting down alarmists like Lovelock. The point here is that you are even wrong regarding where I come from; before this subject and others I debunked many of the followers of the moon hoax, I got into that thanks to my experience in media and image formats and the science and historical evidence that told me how out of it the conspiracy theorists were.
Same with this issue, history allowed me to notice that virtually all contrarians insist on refusing to accept the evidence presented regarding the progress made with paleo climate (because it made their beautiful theory about how warm the medieval warming was inadequate, that warming was not as important as they assumed) was enough for me to conclude that contrarians follow the idea that climate scientists are into a conspiracy.
The points you are making here do rely on a conspiracy of sorts, but I think here this is mostly related to the incompetency of many in the popular press. The problem here is that you think that I follow the popular press when I look at this issue. Or that we should look at it to confirm a bias, as pointed that is not really important, what is important is to check what the researchers and experts agree nowadays, not what the popular press gets wrong.