All I'm catching onto is that you are so uninformed that you will believe whatever the loudest person screams at you.

All I'm getting from this is that you think that mis-categorizing a few of 12,465 articles in a study means the whole study is garbage, even though that is well within the margin of error for any study. Furthermore, even if the 3 scientists you mention (2 shills and a hack, see below) were properly categorized, the change would be so small that the number would still be 97%...

Willie Soon

"Over the past decade, Soon's research and his salary have been funded largely by fossil-fuel interests, which provided over $1.2 million in funding over 10 years, including $409,000 from The Southern Company and $230,000 from Charles G. Koch Charitable Foundation. These funding sources were not disclosed in a number of papers published since 2008, leading the Smithsonian Institution to investigate whether Soon had violated conflict-of-interest policies."

Craig Idso

"Idso is a lead author of the reports of the Nongovernmental International Panel on Climate Change (NIPCC), a project sponsored by the Heartland Institute. An unauthorized release of documents indicate Idso received $11,600 per month in 2012 from the Heartland Institute."

Nicola Scafetta

"Scafetta has argued, "At least 60% of the warming of the Earth observed since 1970 appears to be induced by natural cycles which are present in the solar system."[9] In 2009, Scafetta faced criticism for failing to disclose the computer code required to reproduce his research."

I'm amazed how people believe a few hacks that support their own ignorant world view, even in the face of overwhelming and incontrovertible evidence to the contrary. Climate change is a fact, and the only "science" denying climate change is either funded by the very organizations responsible for it, or not competently performed. It's like believing the Earth is flat, or that the Earth is 4,000 years old, you are stupid for believing it.