How could all those scientists be wrong? They do not acquire sufficient knowledge to be real scientists, because the basic knowledge of science is too abstract for them.

Yet the bliss of ignorance tells them that superficial knowledge is all that is required in science. So they don't know that they are not real scientists. They go through superficial processes and fill in the voids with guess-work and assumptions rather than evidence-based proof.

That approach is religion, not science, because guessing and assuming creates a belief system rather than knowledge. It's not that religion has to be wrong, it's that religion is the default position when separated from reality.

In the absence of knowledge, everything is a belief; so everything is religion to ignorant persons. Only adequate knowledge in basic abstract areas can go beyond religion and into the objective realm.

Objective reality is the alternative to subjective belief. It takes abstract understanding to relate to objective reality correctly.

A correct relationship to objective reality, which requires an understanding of abstract relationships between realities, allows correct evaluation and representation of complex realities.

Errors create a separation from the complexities of objective reality. To then try to evaluate and represent realities which are in error is an artificial exercise disconnected from objective reality.

If incompetent persons were to simply withdraw from the complexities which they do not understand, it would be normal limitations. But when they promote their erroneous assumptions, a complex process is required to justify and impose conflicts with reality onto other persons.

Imposing a complex and subjective process is viewed as a religion or cult, because the perpetrators believe in something that is not true. Activity separated from objective reality has the characteristics of religion due to belief replacing correct knowledge.

Religion takes a bad rap because of corrupters promoting it. But religion does not require error. Believing in error is religion, but not all religion is believing in error. Religion can get a lot of things right and still be religion due to the totality of scope.

In summary, scientists and nonscientists who are disconnected from abstract complexities can only promote a subject as religion, not as science. Promoting ignorance instead of withdrawing from unknowns is a form of religion.

The promoters of science as religion view science critics as infidels. Instead of rational evaluation, critics are attacked subjectively being viewed as a threat to the belief system.

Subjective attack is produced by persons who are wrong and promote errors. Such persons do not understand that imposed subjectivity is never valid, while objective explanations are always justified, even if wrong.

Why is global warming promoted by persons who know nothing of science? Because the promoters believe in the cause. Science is not a cause. Since such persons have no ability to properly represent science, they are obviously doing something other than promoting science.

Causes are promoted through authoritarianism; science is antithetical to authoritarianism. Nonscientists promoting science could only move the subject out of the realm of science and into the realm of religion.

Persons who promote a greenhouse effect base their claims on the assumption that there can be no error in science. With that assumption there will be nothing but errors in science. It takes accountability to the public to remove errors from any power mongering activity including science.