I don&#x27;t doubt there&#x27;s fraud in science. Stories pop up pretty frequently that show researchers claiming some new breakthrough with fudged data.<p>But what would be required here would be far more than that. Individual fraudsters wouldn&#x27;t be enough. Even systemic fraud wouldn&#x27;t do it. It would need to be <i>universal</i> fraud, across basically the entire world. And it would need to be <i>coordinated</i>, to ensure everybody gives the same kind of fraudulent results.<p>It&#x27;s especially unbelievable because many countries have a vested interest in the world&#x27;s ability to continue burning fossil fuels. If climate change were a fraud, they would have a huge incentive to show that. Why would places like Saudi Arabia, Russia, and indeed even the United States not massively fund climate science to debunk the climate change fraud?<p>I could buy the fraud argument if it were a few people. I could even buy it if, for example, there were a massive schism in the field, with one big group saying climate change is real, and another big group saying it&#x27;s not. But when they all speak with one voice, aside from a few tiny dregs of dissent, fraud isn&#x27;t a good explanation.