Bookmark
I’m also a climate dissident or skeptic, and have been ostracized from the profession (in some cases, very actively by the AGW lobby) for about three decades. Yes, it has been going on that long. And I have told friends and family that I don’t expect the whole truth to come out in my lifetime (I am about to reach the retirement birthday of 65, rather ironic since maybe I will now be employable).
What you’ve heard on the outside is about half the story. The other half is one of self-sustaining delusion, rather than fraud. These AGW scientists are mainly victims of their own refusal to step back and admit that an earlier theory (which perhaps looked somewhat more plausible in the 1990s) has not been proven and cannot be proved. And this has led to an increasingly desperate search for a theory that will pass inspection and keep the research grants flowing, and perhaps more importantly, keep the progressive political narrative on life support.
In order to do this many have taken on the self-imposed task of brainwashing themselves and each other into believing that if you keep announcing theoretical ideas often enough (Greenland says this, Antarctica says that, more severe storms, blah blah) they will magically come true. Of course the problem is that none of these theories has been accurately portrayed nor can they come true by mere hope or magic potions and incantations.
That’s why the Swedish scientist defected. He must have noticed that weather patterns in his part of the world were increasingly different from the theoretical predictions and were not supportive of the sort of change that was expected. Sure, there’s change, always has been and always will be. Except perhaps in one area, and that’s my blacklisting and ostracism. Since I never made it into the profession because of my more obvious integrity, I can never receive rehabilitation. Canadians don’t do that, it’s too difficult to admit that many important people were wrong and essentially worthless. Better to imagine that I was instead.