When all else fails, watch the way the parties debate and assess their credibility from their actions.
On one hand, there are scientists who tell you what their error bars are, talk in terms of probabilities, and tell you where they need more data to offer firmer forecasts.
On the other side I have heard
o The planet is not warming up, satellite measurements prove it
o The warming, which isn't happening, ended in 1998
o The warming, which isn't happening, which ended in 1998, is caused by carbon dioxide from volcanoes
o The warming which isn't happening which ended in 1998 which is caused by CO2 from volcanoes has nothing to do with CO2 but is caused by solar output changes
Some of it is honest backlash against people who go beyond the evidence. I dismiss anyone who talks about "saving the planet". The planet was just fine with palm trees growing in Antarctica.
Most of it is cynically calculated intentional disinformation. See the book "The Climate Coverup" for examples of how talking points were tested in focus groups without any investigation into whether they were true.
Then consider, if you don't believe the scientists, that they could be wrong in either direction and things could be worse than they expect. There's actually some data to suggest exactly that. See the book "With Speed and Violence", from a science magazine editor who has excellent BS filters.