Pittsburgh, Paris, And The Population Bomb
Bryan Duff

If you’re trying to convince people about the veracity of catastrophic anthropogenic global warming it’s probably not a good idea to remind them about an idiotic theory that was not only completely wrong in its predictions, but demanded people suffer in order to avert the catastrophe it foretold.

Do 97% of scientists agree on the extent of CO2’s impact, the expected consequences in a complex system, and the proper policy response? Is there even a majority that could be found on all these points? Of course not. 97% of scientists agree that CO2 has a warming effect does not mean what you think it does. A great deal of climate science has been corrupted and has been exposed in several instances. We don’t know its impact and guessez so far have dramatically overstated the case. You shouldn’t conflate agreement on the basic assumptions with support for your policy position and predictions.