A poll of state science beurocrats is supposed to trump the opinion of active climate researchers? The more I hear silly claims like this the more I believe some people will grab at anything to deny evidence for global warming. No one seriously interested in objectively evaluating the worthiness of global warmings validity would rely on such a narrow and tangentially related group. If you narrow your pool enough you can find a group to support just about any position.

I suppose evolution is to be rejected and has little scientific validity because a large portion of Americans don't believe it is scientifically valid? While that is a long stretch from the type of mismatch mentioned in your link, that is the path that type of evaluation is on. The merits of a scientific opinion are not determined by polls but by rigorous scientific debate.

I'm still waiting for a logical argument as to why increasing the concentration of a proven greenhouse gas will not warm up the atmosphere. The preponderence of the counter-arguments dwell on the flaws and unknowns in climate research rather than any plausible rational for it not happening. The one exception is the cloud cover issue often raised, but increased rainfall is an issue even if the temperature remains only slightly elevated. Just ask all the flood victims of recent years.

Regards,
Mark