Not sure why you came to the conclusion from my post that both sides should be equally represented. Instead I am saying that if you are trying to reach the other side and all you do is say facts are on your side then that probably not going to cut it. Anyone can find their own facts or find information that counter what you believe is facts. Case in point would be COVID. We have multiple doctors that have viewpoints all over the place concerning the virus, how to combat it and what works and what does not. At the moment one person fact may be disproven or updated depending on new data that comes in.
Using Climate Change their are still many scientist who do not go along with the majority. Just because its a majority doesn't mean they are all correct and their may be points being withheld that counters to their opinion whether educated or not. Even data can be viewed in different ways if not represented by actual occurrences. Here is a link on the Pros and Cons on the subject but the main thing to understand is that anyone can find data that supports their viewpoint.
If it can be disproven, it's not a fact!
Facts are, the climate is changing, the changes are causing issues and can cause bigger issues in the future.
Conclusion, we might want to do something about it instead of arguing about who causes it.
Of course you'll need some theory what causes it to do something about it. Or you can move coastal cities out of the way and start building new cities further North. Less pollution is never a bad thing though.
Same with Covid
Facts are: Covid is very contagious, can last long and is deadlier than other virulent diseases that are currently around.
Conclusion, we should get rid of it.
The rest are all correlations. Mask use, social distancing, closures have all shown to reduce the spread. Fact is, nothing is 100% effective, but it doesn't have to be. Stay below Rt1 and it will go away.
People get too hung up on the details and lose the bigger picture. In the end, what's better for the economy, wear a mask and skip a holiday or close everything down.
That is the key, what parts are actual fact and what parts are actual opinion. Fact is the climate is changing, is it an opinion that the cause is Human output. This is where data is used and models to prove this point but, when researching this topic you will see that both sides have their data models to prove their point. Who's data is correct. Most layman will not know the difference or even be able to understand the concepts and because of that each side will just pick the model that support their bias.
Take CORVID, as your example its contagious which is fact, the theory part comes into play is the Preventive methods used are they effective. This is not fact but based on educated opinion and there is a lot of opinion on what is effective or not. Just take the issue with mask, when CORVID was first talked about from Fauci and the CDC, they stated mask were not effective but changed that stance once more data came out about the virus. Multiple doctors have chimed in and though the majority still state that mask are effective, there is no definitive scientific data proving it is one way or another. This is why we get conflicting information from different doctors. Also the issue is that you get multiple people in the medical industry chiming in on the topic which also muddies the water because most laymen will just pick the opinion that follow their bias.
Its the details that everyone will look at when basing their opinion on a subject. The bigger picture to you may not be the big picture for them and this goes toward perspective.