Even now there are various scenarios, not a single consensus. And I rather doubt that you personally have verified the climate science, so what makes you so sure?
Btw it is not about humans influencing climate (of course they do), but about the doomsday scenarios.
"Reproducibility and peer review are part and parcel of science and it is always done by other people than the ones involved in the original research."
Peer review is not a a guarantee for good science, it was invented for the government grant system. Sorry if people call on the peer review system, to me it just shows they are delusional about the workings of the science systems in most places.
"But to you 'other people' may include people that have not studied the subject matter and that are not capable of following the arguments"
Everybody can study the subject matter, that is the thing. It is you who claims only certain people of your choosing are capable of doing so.
"And I'll throw my lot in with the 99.9%, not because it makes my life any easier but simply because that makes good sense."
Do you even know what the 99.9% say? You can check how that number was derived - it was people evaluating abstracts and judging whether those papers agree that humans affect climate. It doesn't say everybody agrees on the doomsday scenarios.