1) The Earth is presently warming. I estimate that greenhouse gas emissions are a very significant component (~70%) of the long-term (100 years) climate change and a significant component (~30%) of short-term climate change (20 years). I think the IPCC is right, though this is largely because of their wide error bars (wide error bars should also be applied to my estimates above!)
2) It was presented as simple fact, and I accepted it. As I studied physics, my understanding became more nuanced, but nothing I found contradicted the initial impression. There was a period when I had a much higher estimate of the probability of massive cascading ice-slides that would eventually (not soon) raise the sea level noticeably over a short period. Recently I have attended a number of climate-related talks at APS conferences. That filled in certain gaps in my understanding (of course, I still have large remaining gaps)
3) The data since 1998 had been steadily decreasing my confidence since about 2004. Then I found out about the deep-sea temperature increases, and my confidence was restored most of the way (unfortunately - I'd been hoping we were missing an important effect that made GHG not matter so much).
Also, though it changed my expectations, it didn't really change my beliefs: I found out that CO2 emissions have been dropping.
Climategate's impact: Very little. If someone looked through my old email they'd find similar shorthand that might with an uncharitable reading look like I was basically making up my results, or applying very biased filters to them (I wasn't). Yeah, I 'questioned' my beliefs when I first read about it, but if this were a courtroom, the defense only had to cross-examine to acquit.
4) The recent posts contained some new information, but not that much. I don't know how useful this is.
Note: Please see this post of mine for more on the project, my sources, and potential sources for bias.
I have written a couple of blog posts on my understanding of climate forecasting, climate change, and the Anthropogenic Global Warming (AGW) hypothesis (here and here). I also laid down the sources I was using to inform myself here.
I think one question that a number of readers may have had is: given my lack of knowledge (and unwillingness to undertake extensive study) of the subject, why am I investigating it at all, rather than relying on the expert consensus, as documented by the IPCC that, even if we're not sure is correct, is still the best bet humanity has for getting things right? I intend to elaborate on the reasons for taking a closer look at the matter, while still refraining from making the study of atmospheric science a full-time goal, in a future post.
Right now, I'm curious to hear how you formed your views on climate change. In particular, I'm interested in answers to questions such as these (not necessarily answers to all of them, or even to only these questions).