I happen to be a scientist, a real one.
And, I'm quite familiar with the scientific method, which has been wholly stifled in this political scare-mongering scenario.
For example, what the warmists purport does not even qualify to be an hypothesis (one needs first an observation, and computer models are not observations).
Also, it is standard among scientists to invite critical review of one's methods, results, and conclusions. The warmists are secretive about their methods, their results are computer outputs, and their conclusions apparently preceded every other step.
Instead of welcoming challenging views, they ridicule them; and, instead of being independent of political input, they are lockstep fifth-column warriors along the shining path of left-wing progressivism.
They avoid challenging views because they fear them.
Warmists are the precise opposite of scientists, they are obedient servants.
An honest an professional scientist or engineer seeks reputable critical review. He recognizes that his product has serious repercussion if wrong. Critical peer review is part of demonstrating the integrity some just dont have.
“97 percent of the scientests agree” is an intentional misquote by the alarmists pulled from the Cook study of the internal Climategate emails that confirmed the fraud of Climategate. Cook found that of the reviewed professional literature, which U.of East Anglia conspirators admittedly controlled, there was 97 percent of a third agreement in CO2 contributing to “Global Warming”. His report actually confirmed the conspiracy. “97 percent of a third” is still less than a third but its only a third among the papers that were allowed to be published. The top huricane expert in USA went to his grave complaining that he couldn’t get published because of these UAE people.