A non-myth about them would be that they dont release their data on which they publish on the basis that others would just try to prove them wrong (thats how science works). Their articles dont appear in peer reviewed journals because nobody cant be arsed to review their unverifiable bullshit. But its good enough for the mass media i guess.
They do, for example, use more data from metropolitan areas (than in the past), which would obviously skew the results in favor of some kind of warming. This doesnt have to be the case but they keep the data so nobody can actually figure stuff out.
Based on their potentially skewed data, they build models and let some computers figure out that there will be warming.
They try to shame "non-believers" instead of convincing them by way of being right.
They hold their data hostage so that anyone who wants to actually have a career in the field has to buy into their agenda.
Science is usually done by people who have a position guaranteed for life, which shields them from political repercussions. The intergovernmental panel on climate change is a multinational agency that tries to undermine the freedom scientists have in carrying out their job to create results favoring their claims. Whether they do that in spite of or because of better knowledge doesnt matter at that point. Global warming is a topic scientists arent allowed to research freely, closely resembling the way german historians cant publish anything that would allege the third reich having cost less lives than is "public knowledge".
They do all this on the basis that they are the best at what they do and others need not even try. They put out absolute truths because they can and dont need opposing shitheads to shit all over their brilliant work.
Science is only good science when it fits the leaders agenda
Enjoy
