Sorry loose syntax.
What I meant was that most of the people I meet who do not believe in this stuff (for a wide variety of reasons) have started out as firm believers.
Many of them (like me) started to look into various aspects of the subject;everything from economics to hydrodynamics to data records and presentation. They all found (like me) how thin and dubious the whole thing is.
As soon as you start asking questions, it all seems to look a bit “made up”.
To quote James Lovelock (he of Gaia fame and a great believer):
“The great climate science centres around the world are more than well aware how weak their science is. If you talk to them privately they’re scared stiff of the fact that they don’t really know what the clouds and the aerosols are doing. They could be absolutely running the show. We haven’t got the physics worked out yet.”
From the UK Guardian: see in context here: James Lovelock on the value of sceptics and why Copenhagen was doomed | James Lovelock | The Guardian
And on this evidence, many want to institute an undemocratic World Government.
'Course now you think I’m going to quote some mad eco-loon.
Nope Scientific American
http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/observations/2012/03/17/effective-world-government-will-still-be-needed-to-stave-off-climate-catastrophe/
Good luck with that idea.