I don't know if they are right or wrong. I know the weather has changed the last 3-4 decades (heck, I've been there and felt it on my own body). I don't even doubt that humans contribute to it. What I do doubt is that it is all man made and question what part of the change is human contribution and what part a result of naturally occurring cycles.
When somebody who is on CSIRO's payroll step up and say 'Oh no, the sky falling', I question the objectivity (because her salary depends on research grants that assume the research is necessary). Likewise, I would laugh my butt off if some Haliburton sponsored scientist stands up and claims 'The sky is firmly in place'.
The 'mock translation' thing I posted previously was popular already when I went to the university a couple of decades ago, which was about when I decided that I cared more about finding answers than formalizing and documenting the method that lead to the answer. Too much pompousness and pretentiousness in science back then, doubt it has changed much today, where scientists scramble for research grants offered by institutions and corporations with ulterior (and not always obvious) motives and scientists have to market themselves as if they were some kind of sport stars.
I miss the days of idealists who wanted to find answers for the answers sake