[37r7rudjduj]

If orgs like Skeptical Science already exist and are influencing academia then why should the public assume that the advice of climate scientists is anything but political at this point? Laymen don't have the insight to make judgements about which scientists are quacks and which are just under fire from a cancel campaign. You can't expect to be treated with credibility while being this susceptible to outside influence and it's weird that there isn't a universal effort to identify and decry this sort of behavior within the field.

[olliej]

What? Skeptical science calls out scientists who are regurgitating false information, and proven incorrect theories. People should expect not to be hired as scientists when they’re doing that.

Why should I trust an someone to not lie to support any other incorrect or unproven belief?