I know it's a very touchy subject, but I'd like to hear some discourse at least.

Right now, there is a big problem with climatology that few are willing to recognize.

For decades, the authorities and individual entities in charge of climate science have been given carte blanche to change their stories without any repercussions and to address anyone who bought into their previous predictions as "wrong". That the stuff thousands of us can distinctly recall reading in our school science textbooks and hearing from our teachers (acid rain melting roofs/turning hair green, entire countries being underwater by 2010) were apparently "misremembered".

So this guy (Peter Ridd) one day decided he'd had enough of this argument and started going back through recent history, listing every single instance a reputable source made a factually incorrect assertion on the environment. Unsurprisingly Ridd (and the unassociated Extinction Clock website) have faced strong opposition for what appears, on the surface, to be merely the crime of documentation and attempting to hold fearmongers responsible for their actions.

Of particular note is perhaps Stanford professor Paul Ehrlich, who believed that the world's populace would, for lack of a better description, spontaneously combust by the late 1980s. Ehrlich should have all his scientific credentials stripped from him and arguably thrown in prison for attempting to incite mass hysteria on multiple occasions. Doesn't help that his credibility was then further demolished in the Simon-Ehrlich wager, where he made 5 predictions on resource scarcity between 1980 - 1990 and was hysterically wrong with all 5 of his selections.