No one reasonable advocates just doing any old damn thing to the environment to see what happens, and no one objects to the kinds of studies mentioned in the original post to try to see exactly how the Earth's climate works.

There is a reason that conservatives and individualists* are skeptical of the current environmental movement. The reason is that much of the leadership of the modern-day environmental movement is blatantly and virulently anti-industrial, anti-technology, anti-capitalist, anti-Western, anti-individual, and often just plain anti-humanity. It doesn't take a very long conversation with these types to ferret out their real attitudes.

As such, every position the radicals take has to be taken with a grain of salt. They are not above faking evidence or selecting facts out of context to suit their agenda.

A good touchstone to discover one of these people is to ask how they feel about nuclear power, a workable, practical and realistic near-term solution to energy supply and carbon dioxide emissions. A real scientific environmentalist will be concerned about the issues involved, but willing to discuss it. A radical, left-wing environmentalist will literally blow a gasket in front of your eyes. I've done this. It's fun.

*"Genesis Types?" Where the heck does THAT come from? Does that imply that only irrational, superstitious people are opposed to the destruction of Western Civilization?