Those who disagree are purged from the ranks.
They are denied the positions which would permit them to conduct 'peer review', and denied that review on a scientific basis.
The system is rigged.
Denied access, denied even the consideration of those who put their stamp of approval on research, they are called "deniers" when they are the ones denied.
Science is NEVER "settled", always subject to being questioned--otherwise it becomes dogma.
This is an era that will go down in history (should it even be recorded and the books survive the coming dark age) as one of mass insanity.
Yeah...if science were “settled” Einstein would have remained working as a patent clerk.
Especially when you have a fundamentally unfathomable question like this. How do you evaluate a phenomenon that is far more than skin deep, with only skin deep data and theories? Yesterday they thought man was beckoning on an ice age. Now they think man is beckoning on global warming and catastrophic at that (climate dither is not worthy of being worried about).
What “deniers” deny is that the warmists/changeists have any kind of acceptable model to work with. That their concerns have any deeper basis than sheer worry.