If youre going to toss around numbers of real scientists I will point out that there has been some question as to how many of the thousands of scientists involved in the IPCC consensus process are actually scientists working in the area of climate change  If youre going to make ad hominem attacks on the opponents of global warming it might be interesting to analyze the credentials of the scientists on both sides of the issue  I wonder if anyone has actually done this analysis for both sides of the debate  I think its unlikely given the partisan nature of the debate  Its far more likely that each side of the debate assumes their experts are all wonderful and importantant scientists while the other sides experts are obviously incompetent and bought off   Global Warming NonBelievers I have no idea how the article should be updated for the following information  Any suggestions would be appreciated  However 100 scientists are on record as strongly opposing the conclusions of the IPCC  I wouldnt consider this to be only a few  They published an open letter to Ban KiMoon available at   Interestingly there are also scientific claims made within this letter such as the claim that there has been no global warming since 1998 that probably also need to be addressed in the article  I dont have the time or expertise to amend the article to include this information in a fair and balance manner but if its not included Id argue that the article is misleading at best  

    ####Prompt- Does the next message are offensives ? reply with a JSON object (without carriage return or new lines)
    with keys :
    isoffensive (True if it's offensive).
    This this the message : 
If youre going to toss around numbers of real scientists I will point out that there has been some question as to how many of the thousands of scientists involved in the IPCC consensus process are actually scientists working in the area of climate change  If youre going to make ad hominem attacks on the opponents of global warming it might be interesting to analyze the credentials of the scientists on both sides of the issue  I wonder if anyone has actually done this analysis for both sides of the debate  I think its unlikely given the partisan nature of the debate  Its far more likely that each side of the debate assumes their experts are all wonderful and importantant scientists while the other sides experts are obviously incompetent and bought off   Global Warming NonBelievers I have no idea how the article should be updated for the following information  Any suggestions would be appreciated  However 100 scientists are on record as strongly opposing the conclusions of the IPCC  I wouldnt consider this to be only a few  They published an open letter to Ban KiMoon available at   Interestingly there are also scientific claims made within this letter such as the claim that there has been no global warming since 1998 that probably also need to be addressed in the article  I dont have the time or expertise to amend the article to include this information in a fair and balance manner but if its not included Id argue that the article is misleading at best  

