I asked, "Would you poll only homeopaths about the efficacy of homeopathy?"
And jhoptoad replied, "No, but I would restrict the polling to individuals whose expertise is at least relevant... I wouldnt care what a climate scientist thinks about equine surgery."
Fair enough. Stick to geophysics, then.
From the Bulletin of the American Meteorological Society we learned that a 2009 survey found most broadcast meteorologists say that they disagree with the IPPC claim that humans are primarily responsible for recent global warming.
A 2010 survey of all American broadcast meteorologists by researchers at George Mason University confirms that result.
A 2013 survey of all AMS Professional Members (not just broadcast meteorologists) yielded similar results. Of 1821 Members who completed the survey, there were 1203 Meteorologists & Atmospheric Scientists, 232 Climatologists, and 386 others. (33 other Members returned incomplete surveys.) Of the 1821 Members who returned complete surveys, 52% believe global warming is real and mostly caused by humans. Of the 1435 Climatologists, Meteorologists & Atmospheric Scientists just under 50% believe global warming is real and mostly caused by humans, and of the 1203 Meteorologists & Atmospheric Scientists only 45.5% believe global warming is real and mostly caused by humans. (Unfortunately, the survey didn't ask how many of those Members who think global warming is real & man-made also think it is a problem. Most scientists who are skeptical of climate alarmism accept that global warming is real, and at least partially man-made, but also think it is modest and non-threatening.)
Even back in 2007, before Climategate [etc.], when Harris polled 500 leading American Meteorological and Geophysical scientists (details here), there was no consensus. Harris found that:
“97% agree that 'global average temperatures have increased' during the past century. But not everyone attributes that rise to human activity. A slight majority (52%) believe this warming was human-induced, 30% see it as the result of natural temperature fluctuations and the rest are unsure.”
The June 2013 newsletter (TAG 167) of the Geological Society of Australia (GSA) illustrates the ongoing lively debate in the scientific community about anthropogenic climate change. In 2009, the GSA's Executive Committee issued a statement in support of global warming alarmism, but they subsequently withdrew it due to intense criticism from the Society's members. On p. 9 of the June 2013 newsletter you'll read that in 2010 an independent poll of GSA members found that 53% disagreed with the Executive Committee's 2009 statement. So, in 2012, the Executive Committee tried again. They drafted a new, more balanced position statement (from TAG 165 pp. 6-7), more accurately reflecting the Members' beliefs. But the Society's members were so divided on the subject, and the debate was so rancorous, that they finally gave up on trying to reach a consensus. That's why the GSA takes no position on climate change.