"Well, of course he converted from a skeptic to a believer! I have heard the same argument made to support Christianity."

Don't fixate on the language used, but on his research. He had every reason in the world to conclude what his paymasters wanted. Why didn't he?

"I wouldn't characterize all people that believe in anthropogenic global warming as zealots. Hopefully that isn't how I came across. There is definitely a sub group that are so invested in the idea of CO2 based gloabal warming that no matter what current evidence or new evidence might come up, it wouldn't change their minds. Which basically means that they have faith in this AGW idea."

No, nobody's like this and it's an absurd caricature you're using to dismiss legitimate scientific findings.

"One of the issues I have with AGW being pushed by the mainstream media, governments and educational institutions, is that for the last 20 years that people have been focused on it, almost all the other real environmental issues have been ignored. Deforestation and constant plowing leading to topsoil loss and desertification is a huge issue and where is the public outcry? Nitrification of our lakes and streams from synthetic fertilizers and improperly managed livestock operations is also a big deal and I hear nothing about it almost."

I don't think that's the case. There's still plenty of attention paid to those problems. If you gauge how much work is being done on solving a problem by your personal awareness of it, consider that's mostly connected to the amount of news coverage each problem receives.

"It is getting late and I don't have time to write an essay, maybe I can do a follow up video. To keep it brief though, I trust my five senses and gut a whole lot more then a bunch of academics."

So do flat Earthers.

"I have seen too much shenanigans with science when it comes to health issues to just blindly trust the "experts" on global warming."

I'm gonna guess those shenanigans were fake news though, like "climategate" which was a whole lot of nothing.