I'm fully aware of how they arrived at the 97% number because like all good peer reviewed scientific studies they documented their process.
I'm also aware of your bought and paid for debunkers and their blatant misrepresentation.
Their misrepresentation was to point out that most of the studies cited didn't specifically say man causing global warming,
regardless of the fact that the studies were in support of mainstream climate theory.
Their assumption and yours are there are two sides such that a study would need to specify which they were supporting.
There's not. There's mainstream climate theory which is well supported and describes the evidence and on your side a bunch of unsupported hypotheses.
What's really funny about all this is the Koch brothers already
paid for a red team and after investigating he became a converted skeptic.
https://mobile.nytimes.com/2012/07/30/opinion/the-conversion-of-a-climate-change-skeptic.html