6) I won't argue the percentage of scientists that agree or disagree. That number changes from year to year and is irrelevent when the system the scientists work under is considered.
7) It is a fact however that the governement is funding study after study regarding GW--so what is a scientist who is not a predetermined proponent of MMGW to do--refuse his grant money? The current crop of studies are based on the hypothesis that all of the warming is made made--and that is pure crap. The grant system is flawed to begin with and drives scientist to preconcieved, politically correct conclusions and views--in other words, they read the data and report what the government wants to hear, or the grant money goes to other scientists that agree with the government position--thus your 97% It's fairly well known that the scientists who currently publically question MMGW are now ridiculed and denied government grant money.
4) Read "The Politically Incorrect Guide to Global Warming" by Horner for a brief synopsis of Al Gore's "not sufficiently precise" and "minor incorrect" arguments--you may be extremely surprised just how wrong and "not precise" he was.
5) You are right about it being irrelevant to the science of GW that Sendler did not win the Nobel--I was merely pointing out the the Gore prize was politically motivated and that Sendler was a much better candidate in comparison.
8) Lets not all panic about GW--while this may or may not be man made (i do believe that a certain amount of it is, by the way), biology scientists have shown that throughout history, plant life, man, and animal life have all done better (i.e., thrived) in warmer climates versus colder ones.
I also believe that the US and its citizens can do little to affect GW in comparison to the real polluters in the world--China, India, and the rest of the Eastern half--China is by far the worst, and will do nothing policy wise to lower their emissions--my EV is like spitting in the ocean, to be honest. But I'm getting it anyway--why? Because it makes good economic sense for me. When MMGW proponents get off of their holier-than-thou sermon boxes, and we create the technology and policies that will allow us to lower emmissions responsibly while keeping our standard of living, it will be a lot easier and faster that forcing society to do it with higher costs and less freedoms.