Where and how can I find...

[Kephapaulos]

...alternative books, websites, and other resources about the truth about climate change/global warming being false?

[Padraig]

Let's avoid click-bait-y titles.

You can try this site as a starting place:
https://wattsupwiththat.com/

[Heinrich]

Why bother when we already know it's politicized crap like Wuhan Foo

[Daniel]

...alternative books, websites, and other resources about the truth about climate change/global warming being false?

Probably not on sites that are denying it. Just as the environmentalists like to make up facts and cherrypick the data in order to push their agenda, anti-environmentalists do the same thing.

I think the better question to ask would be, is climate change false?

I have no idea if there are any unbiased sources out there. Probably not. There might be some relatively unbiased sources though. But your best bet might be to do the research yourself. Gather as much past weather data as you can, and examine the trends. If it looks pretty uniform, then climate change is false. But if it's not uniform then the climate has in fact changed.

As far as nature worship and population control are concerned, we can reject those on the basis that they are contrary to revelation.

[james03]

https://wattsupwiththat.com/

The go to place. 

The satellite global temperature project also:

https://www.drroyspencer.com/latest-global-temperatures/
updates once per month.  Trend of about 1C per century, which is not catastrophic.  Last reading was below the baseline temperature, but that is only one data point.

If you want discussions which have revealed fraud after fraud in climate "science", this site is good, but technical:
https://climateaudit.org

In summary, if CO2 is warming the planet, then we're looking at 1C per century and nothing catastrophic.  The next doubling would be 800 ppm CO2 which would be 2 C of warming.  It's doubtful we'd ever attain that before thorium and fusion take over.  We definitely won't see 1200 ppm, which would be 3C of warming.

The climate cultists keep saying 3C of warming by 2100.  Not going to happen.

But we might not even get the 1C.  Because a lot of cooling is done by evaporation, with clouds radiating to space.  CO2 doesn't effect that in a meaningful way.  And we have natural warming and cooling cycles.  Some say that the sun entering a prolonged quiet phase, which it has done, will lead to future cooling.

[james03]

Here's a riddle.

Suppose you have a globe like a bowling ball that is 100% reflective (zero emittance/radiation).  You heat the ball to 80F via convection and set it in space.  1 million years later you check the temperature of the ball and it is still 80F as you would expect (assume no impacts besides photons).  Your goal is to cool down the ball as fast as possible.  You have 2 options.  You can give the globe an atmosphere of 100% CO2 or 100% nitrogen.  Which would cool down the globe quickest?

(this is why climate science is a fraud.  They don't take this into account).