Based on the second claim of stfu’s post, “as soon as humans are involved data and data analysis will always be subjective”, I think he is really trying to highlight the unpredictability of a model that must generalize human choices using statistics. Since even conservative scientists will agree that climate change has some anthropogenic dimension, we should understand the limitations of modeling it.
Being skeptical of the model, however, does not prohibit you from accepting what the model is suggesting. Historical data and scientific opinion can be enough to convince us that climate change is occurring. But no model can predict how our reaction to that knowledge will affect climate change in the future.
I think two important metrics are being left out of the author's perspective:
1. What value do I assign to my personal free time?
2. Does my purchase have the ability to save me time?
For instance, a cup of coffee will cost me 15 minutes of my salaried time PLUS 15 minutes of my personal time (to drive, order, pay, etc). However, perhaps I am a writer and the coffee and coffeeshop environment will help me accomplish 2 hours of writing in 90 minutes. Then the whole thing is a wash.
Being skeptical of the model, however, does not prohibit you from accepting what the model is suggesting. Historical data and scientific opinion can be enough to convince us that climate change is occurring. But no model can predict how our reaction to that knowledge will affect climate change in the future.