"97% Consensus Lie"

That is another one of many lies from you.  There is not enough space here to explain it in detail, but every attempted rebuttal of Cook (2013) has been based on egregious errors in math and logic by the alleged "debunkers."
1) They define consenusus incorrectly as the number of papers with quantitative evidence for AGW.  Nope.  Consensus means general agreement among experts that AGW is valid.  That is the way Cook defined it.
2) They incorrectly include papers that are irrelevant to the question in the denominator, making the fraction arbitrarily small.  Cook correctly culled out "no position" papers.
3) They ignore a theorem that the sum of probabilities of all outcomes in sample space must = 1.  Cook satisfied that theorem.

Besides, you have the fact that not a single science organization or society in the world disagrees with AGW, which affirms the seven published papers on this subject.

PopTech is a disinformation site.