GW is real, I dont think you can deny that . You seem to want to deny the means of measurement of sea level rise. There are quite a few different techniques involved and all seem to agree within acceptable method limits. An avg of about 2mm /yr, with a spike or two in the end of the last century.
We can mesure it by geostationary satellites with ultra accurate clocks all calibrated for every kind of wobble and precession and planetary cycle we can measure. Tidal gages , also, are very sophisticated instruments that are corrected for tectonic forces in active areas (we also can measure continental drift in the cm/yr area0.
Theres a trick called Ghyben Herzberg and a newer hydrodynamic equation set that allows ocen measurements by monitoring ground water levels along sea coasts.
All these are methods that say the same numbers.
You know we can measure an atoms vibration and the distance to a star by parallax?
We can measure the ionic radius of almost all the elements. SO, measuringsomething to a mm or a cm is like a highway.
Mesurement of the acidification fo the ocean, although not a direct cause of GW, is, at least, a symptom.
The warm periods of the Cenozoic have shown to be rather cyclic and the specific sunspot or woble or Daansgaard cycles may be the entire cause or part cause. I dont think , as an earth scientist, I fully buy the "its all humanity's fault". But the more evidence I see, the more that this GW cycle seems to be reaching higher avg temps worldwide than the previous interglacial periods and, MOTS IMPORTANT, the measurments on sea acidifcation and ice core isotopes, and chemical erosion of marble statuary(and things like tombstones) since the 1700;s show an acceleration of chemical erosion with time since the 1700's . I cant ignore these data. I certainly cant say its bullshit. Its data that is repeatable, comes together by several overlapping means, and has been done by thousands of scientists.
As far as the "200 scientists", I think that we are both not accepting anthropogenic GW. WHere we differ is that I dont deny its occurence and Im still looking at as much data as I can read. (both sides). Theres hundreds of thousands of real scientists who accept an anthropogenic GW. You and I are in a minority