I get into a lot of
arguments discussions about conspiracies but the one that most bothers me of late is climate change. Over time in these discussions I realized that the alleged conspiracy would have to be the largest ever by a wide margin and, because no one else had, I built up a list of what would have to be true for climate science, as a whole, to be a conspiracy. After the jump is the quite long but still not complete version of this story:
There has been a publicly staged fraudulent debate about the effects of atmospheric emissions for over 40 years. Each paper, lecture, and conference created by the early competing scientists in the fields of atmospheric chemistry, geology, oceanography and atmospheric physics was a elaborate charade. This charade was openly carried out in all of the scientific journals of the different fields, which all face independent peer review, meaning every expert reviewing this data, for each paper, was either too ill-informed to spot the large errors (that must be there if it was all just a hoax) or was in on the conspiracy. With all of these journals across many disciplines at least fooled, and likely in on it, the conspirators forged on to create their own journals, and massively expand the field, eventually leading to the creation of dozens of new journals, thousands of new papers and hundreds of conferences and talks in the then emerging fields of paleoclimatology, paleotempestology and climate modeling all under the umbrella of wholly fraudulent cross-disciplinary climate science. As they piled years worth of fraudulent evidence which slowly pointed more and more at an average temperature increase in the future, a steady rise in the second half of the 20th century, and more at a causal role for humans all outsiders who could understand the issues failed to expose them. With this fake data they gained the recognition of the international scientific community and the national academies of science around the world, who certainly would have been able to spot a hoax and who therefore must all be in on the conspiracy. They proceeded to independently gather support of NGOs, government bureaucrats and scientific journalists, many of whom themselves would have scientific backgrounds or zeal for truth enough to spot a hoax.
Throughout this decades-long process no one ever broke the wall of silence despite the fact anyone who chose to reveal the colossal fraud with reliable evidence would not only gain international prestige but also fortune (especially in the past several years).
So either all this happened or the data the many scientists around the world collected is honest and therefore the overwhelming majority of the qualified minds in the fields do think humans are likely causing climate change, whether or not you personally think something should be done about it.