PopularTechnology.net did a collection 1,350+ Peer-reviewed papers supporting skeptic arguments against AGW alarmism. This means the Consensus side needs to show a list of 45,000 papers that support AGW, to achieve their 97% claims, or we can agree that the claims of 97% are greatly overstated.
1,350+ Peer-reviewed papers supporting skeptic arguments against AGW alarmism. The point is that any study of papers that doesn't include these in the against-count, is cherry picking data (or not very good at data collection). Also, if they claim 97% consensus by paper count, just ask for their list of 45,000 papers, which would be required to make 1,350 only 3% of the total published.