Originally Posted by Totenkopf
It's your use of terms like overwhelming that caused me to be curious as to just how many scientists there were that composed this "overwhelming concensus". Hence my query.
That's one way of spinning it. Frankly, I think that as the term "global warming" was becoming too controversial a moniker, they opted for another term. Science adapted, but more to the political realities than the scientific ones.
Nice piece of rhetoric yourself. I'm not irrationally criticizing the "provisional nature of science", but don't buy the spin for the name change either. I don't state anywhere that the climate is static, so you're making quite a leap.
From your posts, at least to me, it seems like you're completely writing off the scientific aspects of climate change and instead looking at it strictly politically.