I've got plenty of experience analyzing data and while it may sometimes be difficult to tell cause from effect as one poster suggested a combination of laboratory work and data can easily sort that out. CO2 is a proven greenhouse gas based on laboratory AND planetary data. That's the fact so many here and this author keep sweeping under the rug. One person's opinion of what the consensus is, is just an opinion. A literature review or a poll of scientists is the correct way to judge scientific consensus. Your source is neither. It is a strrong piece of evidence however that there are real scientists with relevant expertise that doubt global warming. You can also find plenty of paleontologists who doubt an impact ended the dinosaurs reign.

Climate Change 2001: The Scientific Basis

Lots of data

Lots of info on how the models were made and evaluated

Lots of references in refereed journals contrary to your source's claims

All the things your source and so many claim are lacking

At first glance his claims about the participants don't sound so convincing either

Of course this report is far more recent that the link you provided so perhaps his claims were more accurate over a DECADE ago when that article was written

Regards,
Mark