There is no consensus!
If there is not a clear majority then the notion of a consensus is void.
That is the point.
re: 19000 American scientists
The whole idea of AGW is laughable:
The hockey stick graph that omits the medieval warm period that was approx 2C warmer than today!
1998 as the warmest year on record when it was shown to be incorrect!
Temperature leads CO2 change by several hundred years.
According to Professor John Christy(Alabama & Huntsville University) temperatures have not changed over the past 30 years where other climate scientists have asserted that temperature changes have occurred during this period. Christy showed that weather satellite temperature probes and weather balloon readings have coincided during this period and little or no change has taken place in the troposphere.
He explained that surface based readings suffered from the urban heat island effect due to placement in or too near large built up areas so they are misleading.
Sea temperature readings also reinforce this data.
Water content in the atmosphere - do I really need to mention this or it effects!
There is no evidence to suggest that we have adversely effected the earths weather.
As I have stated before people should be more concerned about industrial pollution that gets dumped into the sea and the forest coverage on this planet instead of playing into the hands of the climate change alarmists.
Climate models are at best inaccurate - not much good for next week,
so why do you think that a 10 year or for that matter a 100 year model would be any better?
All the Germans have done is buy themselves some time because they are floundering.
Trying to save face because of the lack of data to support the ruse that has been globally incited.
"my climate model is correct - it is the real world that is wrong" seems to be the case - incorrect data is fed in and therefore incorrect data can only come out, with predictions for the next 100 years that show an expected 2-6 degree C rise in temperature - how can there be so much variation! if the models were correct they would have some consistency.
rubbish in rubbish out.
Like statistics, the models will say whatever they want them to say without ever having to offer any conclusive proof whereas real climate scientists offer real data from many proxies.
The only thing that is heating up globally is hysteria !