...
Maybe you want to argue on the definition of 'settled'. Its pretty clear that no scientific issue is totally settled. Evolution, gravity, electron orbitals..... all are constantly challenged and revised and improved. But the simple, basic fact that AGW exists because of CO2 and other manmade greenhouse gas emissions is not really a scientifically argued point. The magnitude of the effect is being argued, yes, but as you see above, the vast majority of scientists recognize it as a problem, and often a very large problem. And the more they understand it, the more they are concerned (although this does tend to be self-reinforcing, obviously, but thats the case in all science).
Now to combat this point, you'll need to come up with references that show this consensus is not real, but those references need to be from scientific sources. Not blogs. Not opinion polls. Not polls of mining engineers where you pretend they are scientists. Not polls conducted by Mark Morano - political consultant to James Inhofe and now, apparently, a respected scientific figure in the denier community.
So my question is... how can any thinking person believe this is NOT established science?
Its pretty crystal clear - so much so that the scientific community is going out of their way to tell you this fact because they keep getting this odd pushback from politicians and oilmen that gullble citizens (often on the right wing...seems to be a trend) believe.
