> edit: fascinating how easy it is to be downvoted simply by pointing out the lack of credibility of AGW skeptics. I think you have it wrong. Usually it seems

> edit: fascinating how easy it is to be downvoted simply by pointing out the lack of credibility of AGW skeptics. I think you have it wrong. Usually it seems far easier to get downvoted here if you are on the "sceptic" side. That said in your case it might be because you go straight to attacking the credibility of the source without saying anything about the accusation of blatant cherry picking of data. Some commenters try to point out that those 97% of scientists that you refer to are a result of a pretty interesting way to do surveys and statistics. And it only takes one Galileo to observe that the sun doesn't rotate around the earth. It is annoying to have to refute every claim instead of wrapping them in a "denier" blanket statement and rubber stamp with "97% of scientists disagree" (for extremely fuzzy values of 97) Edit: I work in solar and have previously worked in recycling. I am a sceptic possibly about to become a believer but what I perceive as arrogant PC rubber stamping of anyone who asks questions is really annoying to me.