you're saying you believe opposing studies are false because information from WattsUpWithThat.com has convinced you.
You forgot the $275T that is on the hook for the AGW scam. That funds a lot of pseudoscience. WattsUpWithThat is a site where scientists discuss their research, and it is that discussion that formed the basis of my understanding. That's where I learned about the blatant fraud by Michael Mann, who created the infamous 'hockey stick' graph by cherry picking from various records. That's where I learned about 'emailgate' where the discussions between corrupt researchers faking up such data via email were leaked.
"if you could pick between reality being one where humans can affect world climate and one where we could not, and you did so it would align with your financial and/or political interest, which would you pick and why?"
I'd pick the one where the $275T didn't go to scammers, but instead ended up in the hands of folks seizing the means of production with it to create the blessings of civilization themselves, and cutting off parasitic 'useless eaters' like Yuval Hariri, Kill Gates, John Kerry, and King Charles from their sole source of wealth and power, and that's why. I like all the people I've met that have merit because they carry their weight, and I dislike all the people I've met that suck wealth out of my wallet.
"I am interested in your personal understanding about how GHG makes Earth habitable. could you provide it?"
Water vapor is ~90% of the GHG in Earth's atmosphere. The minor gases like CO2 and methane all together contribute the other ~10% of greenhouse effect. Without the GHG effect Earth would be a ball of ice, much like Europa and other moons and asteroids across the solar system in which liquid water is only in protected regions under the solid crust. Maybe life can exist in such places, but life on Earth in all it's robust fecundity is only possible because of GHG's that keep the temperature warm enough on the surface for all three phases of water to exist.
"...define climate..."
Without searching for a dictionary definition (which I am sure would be a better definition), climate is the long term environmental condition of a planet (specifically Earth, because we don't care about Pluto's climate here), the temperature ranges of it's atmosphere and oceans, and the amounts and types of precipitation and cycles of resources, such as water, carbon, and nitrogen.
Anyway, my personal take on this stuff isn't much use to you. Just read the paper and learn the views of lifelong researchers into these matters. Their personal views are well informed and far more useful.
Edit: I asked you to read the paper from Lindzen and Happer politely. I even said please. In it are the answers to all the questions I have patiently answered from you, which you have asked for some unknown purpose that isn't to get to the truth about Earth's climate, because that is better provided by the linked paper. I have asked you to specifically counter evidence you think is wrong, so that you can correct me and enable me to become right. I love to be corrected because I hate being wrong. I have spent a lot more time answering your questions than you would have spent reading the paper. I have been very respectful of you and bent over backwards to enable you to become better informed about what I believe is a harmful and duplicitous scam that will cause you to suffer terribly in days to come if you don't learn the truth.
Why won't you read the paper? Given the effort of posting, and responding to your questions, I have undertaken, I believe I have shown good faith in our interaction. All I have asked of you is to look at the evidence, which I have provided in the linked paper, so that you can decide for yourself what is true and factual and what is not. I am becoming convinced you have some ulterior motive that has not a thing to do with climate, because I have made learning about climate very easy for you - and you do not, but are doing something else that involves asking me for my personal views.
Until you cite some evidence have substantive criticism I think that you have some other purpose than resolving issues of climate for which you are using me. Today I saved a little bird from a cat, putting it high up on a bird feeder with copious food, and a little bit of water, where it was safe to rest and recover until it flew away.
Take freely of what I have provided you, here where I have given you safe haven to learn it without remonstration. But there is no more I can give you to keep you safe from the vicious predators out there. It is time to fly, my friend.
RE: Physics Disproves Anthropogenic Global Warming Scam