I think we have a scientific legitimacy issue that is still ongoing. For example, there has been no "mea culpa" around massive problems such as: The Ozone Hol

I think we have a scientific legitimacy issue that is still ongoing. For example, there has been no "mea culpa" around massive problems such as: The Ozone Hole being discarded initially as erroneous data The US Historical Climate Network flawed sites permitted to enter the climate record The mismatch between highly accurate space based temperature sensors, and US HCN The hiding of warm periods, and the Younger Dryas, convenient dating, hiding the glaciation and deglaciation trends by academic meteorologists for funding/political reasons Intentionally discounting Solar Radiance and Albedo Permitting weather sensors (ASOS) on US runways to enter the weather record - how'd you like a weather report manipulated by prop blast or jet wash? It is the very Cathedral establishment that has approached these issues as "Science the Religion shall not be questioned", instead of science as a process that needs to be continually refined via tight feedback loops. Critics, skeptics, and nay-saying scientists are heretics - prepare them for auto-da-fé I believe in science as a process, not a religion.