[chimprich]

> I didn’t spend more time looking for more and I’m not interested in defending myself.

You just want to throw out accusations without evidence and you're complaining about "climate alarmicism" not getting enough scrutiny?

> Scientists that want to report inconvenient results are terrified.

This is an oft-repeated claim by people engaged in climate denialism, but it's a lie. A conspiracy theory without evidence. Where are all these terrified scientists? Who has been sanctioned for presenting contrary views?

A friend of mine was a climate sceptic. He started a PhD looking at glaciers and ice cores. He was expecting to experience some friction pushing back against the climate orthodoxy, but after looking through the data he changed his mind. He realised our models of the climate were consistent with the evidence.

Consider: if your "terrified scientists" theory was incorrect, and actually scientists did believe that the standard models are correct, wouldn't that state of affairs look identical to what is actually occurring today?

[systemvoltage]

I think CC movement is 70% legit and 30% bullshit. The public is mostly deluded on either side, those that support it and those who oppose it.

I am also not a climate skeptic. I just think that we need more scrutiny. The push back I get from people is insane like the strawman you've conjured up.