Oh please. No one said that. So stop with that blatant logical fallacy. This example was out there for over 20 years before being retracted… 20 years of being quoted and cited. That’s not a small thing.

Look, skeptics aren’t saying “all other scientists are a fraud”, they are saying maybe there is a whole lot of group think going on, and there is more to understand. Maybe it is human-influenced (to some degree), but maybe there is also a natural variation going on. In the meantime, let’s move toward renewables, sure. But let’s also not tank our economy at the alter of righteousness in the process. Maybe a balanced approach is appropriate.

There actually are frauds out there, though. East Anglia “ClimateGate” ring a bell?