For items in the positive side, I’ve struggled to find many and believe me, I read many skeptical articles on global warming. Hence I’ve included a few of the more facetious ones mainly for humour (but also to pad out the positive side a little).

If you can’t prove that your thesis is true, then try to prove that failure to act as if it were true will result in x horrors lasting time t. (Begin with x = your skeptic’s death and t = time of death. Increment x and increment t when challenged. Repeat.) People have an internal function f(x,t)

But it is really because they are building a port where the vilage is!
http://www.creditablecarbon.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=30

“How good are climate scientists at predicting the future? On the whole, says Prof. Armstrong, they’re probably no worse than any other group of experts ? which is to say, not very good at all. Abundant research shows that experts ? whether they’re political scientists, stock market analysts, Super Bowl commentators or marine biologists ? are no better than non-experts at making accurate predictions. They’re just more certain that they’re right”

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20080201.cowent02/BNStory/Front/home

.

What do you mean I missed you main points?

We don’t, or at least shouldn’t, put any weight behind a poll that does not publish its certainty, sample size, and sampling method let alone its assumptions like “given that AGW is true… .” Instead too many believe the one sided AGW stories that the media present without question because it is from ‘experts.’

“…because it is impossible that climate change can only be bad”

This reminds me of reports in Canada about the ever changing dollar. If it goes up, then the media report that manufacturers, tourism operators, and exporters will be hurt. When it drops with respect to the US currency, then consumer confidence is lessened and our economy will take a hit.

John M Reynolds