Yes, I understand your point. I am not saying that the politicasition of scientists does not matter let alone that it is desirable or should be allowed. I was f

Yes, I understand your point. I am not saying that the politicasition of scientists does not matter let alone that it is desirable or should be allowed. I was focusing on that very narrow statement you made. Whether the scientists are politicised or otherwise, the most important story is about the actual science as people now do not trust it. They do not perhaps because some scientists have been dogmatic, and perhaps intentionally or otherwise have or have come very close to lying. That of course should not be tolerated at all. However, there are very powerful forces out there which are fighting for the public opinion which is why you may get contradictory views on television. That is fine, we live in a democracy. The scientists have the right to free speech just as much as anyone else and the right to expression through communicating to the world what they believe. The problem and the reason why this story is so very big, is not because scientists expressed their beliefs, but because they have not been doing science proper. The reason why they have not might be because of some dogmatic belief. But they can hold any belief they wish however dogmatic as long as they do proper science, transparently, openly, peer reviewed and are engaging with facts as they are rather than manipulating them.