> Why would this display of science-working-as-intended (regardless of who turns out to be right) damage the credibility of science, except in the eyes of those

> Why would this display of science-working-as-intended (regardless of who turns out to be right) damage the credibility of science, except in the eyes of those who already hold nothing but contempt for science, or those who want to use science as a blunt-force weapon in their petty political games? If you haven't noticed, there isn't just a desire to use science as a political weapon. It actually is a political weapon, and it is used regularly to win political wars. That's why extremely loud pissing matches with politicized goals masquerading as science are problematic for the science community...it is too easy, for too many people, to end up confusing the quest for truth and knowledge with a pursuit for power and control. There are plenty of climate scientists that resent the peon role they've been placed into by politicians that nominally agree with them. By mixing up cause and proposed solutions which happen to be perfectly politically aligned with one side's dogmas, it makes it far too easy to vilify the cause and nullify any chance at a solution. You may see this as science working as expected, but the wide publication of bullshit and subsequent politicization of it is absolutely a problem for science.