The best thing we can do is remove politics from science before it’s too late.
Hence some scientists happen to recommend things (ways to solve a practical problem) and are used by some politicians (through mass-media) who promote those things (far various reasons), and silent counter-arguments from other scientists. Note: consultants also often act as such "excuses", forking a "report" recommending actions which were secretly planned before their mission began.
Those scientists may shoot themselves in the foot by doing so if, as I believe, their job is to explain how things work (nothing more).
I spent ten hour a week, during 3 months (lookdown helped) parsing data for global warming as well as economic data for model like DICE and others. Which data was held back please? I would really like to know? I might have been fooled by the treasure trove of data publicly available.
Is it that the atmosphere overall have the same average temperature[0]? Its not held back. Is it that the low troposphere warming is causing the artic circle to break more often? Nah, i still found the raw data too.
What was really surprising to me about the climate change denial is that the most well-know of "solar forcing" was debunked by physics college students circa 2004, and that despite that (and the cycle ending a while ago) it is still the argument i found the most often. The better argument, low-troposhpere CO2 concentration have a low effect on radiation, i hav seen exactly twice. Without the corollary, a c02 surplus at the surface level take between 20 and 30 year to reach the hgh troposphere/low stratosphere, so every emission right now will have almost no effect until 2040. This data is not held back, and is discussed quite often too.
Did i miss something important?
[0] https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1029/201...