Congrats for arguing little snippets of my post but ignoring the overall argument. I disagree with your logic but lets just accept this part of your post as accurate:
Originally Posted by
HabuHunter
Realistically just about any well trained scientist, but especially those who have studied physics, mathematics, engineering, modelling, statistics, geosciences etc will be able to look at a climate paper and follow along and understand and form an opinion.
Wouldn't you be shocked to hear that those groups of people have read climate papers and come to these conclusions:
Physics:
Earth's changing climate is a critical issue and poses the risk of significant environmental, social and economic disruptions around the globe. While natural sources of climate variability are significant, multiple lines of evidence indicate that human influences have had an increasingly dominant effect on global climate warming observed since the mid-twentieth century.
Statement on Earth's Changing Climate
Engineers:
Engineers Australia accepts the comprehensive scientific basis regarding climate change, the influence of anthropogenic global warming, and that climate change can have very serious community consequences
Engineers Australia - Climate Change Policy
Statisticians:
The American Statistical Association endorses the IPCC conclusions
Statement on Climate Change
Geologists:
Human‐induced climate change requires urgent action. Humanity is the major influence on the global climate change observed over the past 50 years. Rapid societal responses can significantly lessen negative outcomes
Statement on Climate Change
And you can also add
societies of Meteorologists, Chemists, Astronomers, Oceanographers, Biologists, Marine Scientists, Agricultural Scientists, Environmental Scientists, Medical Scientists and so on and so forth....