The whole argument of “counting noses” of scientists is preposterous. They claim that 89.4% or whatever it is this week, of “reputable” scientists, support this or that theory of climate change holds no water at all. Someone who expressed disbelief in this theory would not get through grad school. Someone who did get through grad school, would likely not be granted tenure. Those few who did get tenure, would not be considered “reputable”. So their views are discounted.
This is the same self fulfilling prophesy against those who express some level of acceptance of the theory of Intelligent Design. Those who believe that way either don’t get promoted, or learn to keep silent, so they don’t get labelled. Over time, their “absence” or silence of ID supporters is used to “prove” it to be wrong.
Many med schools now ask prospective students about their views on abortion. If the students are prolife, that is not an automatic rule out, but it is a strike against someone in a very competitive race. Thus, as time goes by, we are now hearing that most doctors are pro choice; the deck is being stacked. The fact that more doctors are prochoice is used as proof that pro choice is the medically advised position. There is no appeal to reason. No perceived need to appeal to reason, logic, morality, etc. Just count noses. And then filter out the noses who disagree with you.
That being said, there are sincere scientists finding good evidence for the Climate Change model. Sadly, their credibility is reduced by their peers, using political media to feed "the FRENZY. They need to separate themselves from the frenzy.
In the Law, this is called Jury picking.