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