"::Okay, there are way too many tangents in this discussion, and that's my fault. My point is that the scientists considered for representing the entire scientific population, groups 1-3 from above, are not a representative sample.  Therefore it is not appropriate to make the ""small minority of scientists"" claim.  The only accurate way to assess the opinions of a large group of scientists is to poll them, as every researcher does not necessarily believe every word in a study they participate in.

 Maybe the larger question is this: what do scientist's opinions matter? They don't get paid to have opinions, but to do objective research.  Let's talk about the results.  Of course I think it's acceptable to have opinion-based articles that are separate from the main GW article, such as Scientific opinion on climate change and List of scientists opposing global warming consensus.   

"