A new meta-analysis* that studied previous meta-analyses of the peer reviewed literature on climate shows that the more a scientist knows about climate science, the more he/she/they are inclined to believe in anthropogenic climate change. So yeah, those “scientists” who deny climate change, or deny that it is us — they may be scientists, but they are not climate scientists. Nevertheless, in the interests of “balance” the media dutifully trot them out to teach the (mythical) controversy.
One of the authors of the study is Sarah Green; a chemistry professor at Michigan Technological University. Another is Merchants of Doubt co-author Naomi Oreskes who first studied climate consensus in 2004). Green says "The public has a very skewed view of how much disagreement there is in the scientific community… Only 12 percent of the US public are aware there is such strong scientific agreement in this area, and those who reject mainstream climate science continue to claim that there is a lack of scientific consensus. People who think scientists are still debating climate change do not see the problem as urgent and are unlikely to support solutions… But climate change denial is not about scientific skepticism." Nope. It is totally about political world view. And the proof of that is in our current slate of potential Presidents (chart modified from NPR):
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------—
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
And yes, I am scientist, and an Earth scientist, so I am probably in roughly the upper quarter of that chart up there.
*Cook et al., Consensus on consensus: a synthesis of consensus estimates on human-caused global warming. Environmental Research Letters, 2016; 11 (4): 048002 DOI: 10.1088/1748-9326/11/4/048002