97% of climate scientists agree that climate change is real.

How many times have you heard that statement?

Probably hundreds.

It may seem like a compelling and scientific argument against fossil fuels, but it's

one of the most illogical unscientific arguments you can make.

To see how, let's use this form of argument for another controversial product, vaccines.

An anti-vaccine person approaches you and says, 97% of doctors say that the side effects

of vaccines are real.

What would you say in response?

You'd probably say, yeah, but the benefits far outweigh the side effects.

By saying that 97% of doctors agree that vaccine side effects are real, without mentioning

any of the benefits of vaccines, the anti-vaccine activist is trying to get you to look at the

potential dangers of vaccines out of context.

When fossil fuel opponents say 97% of climate scientists agree that climate change is real,

they are doing the same.

Yes, using fossil fuels for energy has a side effect, increasing the amount of CO2 in the

atmosphere.

Okay, but what about the upside?

In the case of fossil fuel, that upside is enormous, the cheap, plentiful, and reliable

energy that makes modern life possible, and at a scale, no other energy source can match.

So how significant is the side effect?

This raises another problem with the statement 97% of climate scientists agree that climate

...