I'm not aware of anything called climastrology. Are you talking a foreign language or just trying to be rude in an adolescent way about a particular branch of the natural sciences?
---
Who cares about your hair splitting regarding the 97%. The strong consensus concern about the existence, cause and consequences of planetary warming is the considered view of those engaged in climate science, based on the considerable body of evidence they have.
You are welcome to split hairs and argue statistical semantics, but doing that while advocating doing nothing about AGW is, to me, irresponsible and idiotic.
Climate scientists do not "exhibit a distinct lack of scepticism". In my view they just have a much better sense of priorities and risk management and better judgement than you do.
