Expert Credibility and Swedish Stupidity?

In the article Expert Credibility in Climate Science in PNAS AGW propgandists Schneider et al, argue that

• Preliminary reviews of scientific literature and surveys of climate scientists indicate striking agreement with the primary conclusions of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC): 
• anthropogenic greenhouse gases have been responsible for “most” of the “unequivocal” warming of the Earth’s average global temperature over the second half of the 20th century = ACC = Anthropogenic Climate Change. 
  
• Nonetheless, substantial and growing public doubt remains about the anthropogenic cause and scientific agreement about the role of anthropogenic greenhouse gases in climate change.
• A vocal minority of researchers and other critics contest the conclusions of the mainstream scientific assessment, frequently citing large numbers of scientists whom they believe support their claims. 
• This group, often termed climate change skeptics, contrarians, or deniers, has received large amounts of media attention and wields significant influence in the societal debate about climate change impacts and policy.

The purpose of the article is to show that experts agree, but what is shown is the opposite: 

Experts don't agree.

 

On this basis the Swedish Alliance Government announces to lead  EU into  a new society without fossil fuels and CO2 ACC.

Reasonable? Rational? Clever? No.

Populistic stupidity? Yes. But people are not stupid, since it is their lives and wellfare which is at stake. Do we really as Swedes have to live up to the old idea of "Swedish Stupidity"?