[context]

I found the arguments (against the human causes of global warming) very persuasive - I wasn't expecting to.

I've read other people claim that various statements made are incorrect. But without spending a lot of time studying the data it's difficult to know whether to believe "expert" A over "expert" B.

For example: The argument about the expected temperature gradient from the earths surface through the troposphere. The idea that CO2 induced warming would see temperatures rising as you move from the surface to the top of the troposhpere. The programme claimed that this isn't seen in any (of many/all?) recording studies performed. This is a major problem for proponents on human caused global warming - it's actually a massive/fundamental blow to their theories/arguments. But, I've read others who claim that more recent studies, including satellite bases observations, have shown the "expected" temperature gradient.

So, who do you believe?