Couple basic reasons why the argument against the “97% consensus” isn’t that availing.

How about the lack of polls showing 97%? You have asserted the consensus many times, and have yet to actually show actual evidence.

Also I'd like to stick with climatologists rather than those that specialize in areas irreverent to the subject, and climatologists are far more likely to support man made climate change theory.

And as agreement doesn't prove the theory right, disagreement also doesn't show it is wrong.

https://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus/

You claim to have debunked this but I’m not sure you have

NASA here is careful to note they’re talking about “actively publishing climate scientists” only

Whatever you feel on the subject doesn't mean I didn't, nor did you actually get what I said on the subject right either.

All of NASA's citations do not even try to support the 97% number and therefore are completely irreverent. Even worse the graph I used is from on the of the linked sources and yields around 90% even with the more coached statement, a different answer than what is claimed.

Also nice example of you moving your goalpost from general consensus to a more specific “actively publishing climate scientists”.

“Actively publishing climate scientists” is the best group to use since they are the ultimate experts on this.

If you want to broaden it out to all scientists, the consensus is still overwhelming. Whether it’s 97%, or 94%, or 90%, it’s not truly important to me.

I don’t accept the theory because it enjoys consensus, I accept it because it makes the most sense.

I can agree with that, also note I made the poll template shareable, so you can search for it under doran zimmerman 2009.