Your third bullet point is the most poignant - and also the most infuriating. Arguments from authority are worthless in science, and the fact that politicians use science to prop up their positions when it suits them irritates me to no end. They know that the public generally respects what science has to say, and if they can't find a legitimate scientific study to back up their claims, they'll either make something up, or bribe someone to fudge the data. However, science for hire is no science at all, because the scientific method is to draw a conclusion from available evidence, not find evidence to support a pre-established conclusion; that would be the ideological method. The sad part is that, regardless of whether "science" claims that the world is getting warmer or cooler, most of the data cited by both climate chaos fearmongers and climate change deniers is fake. The public isn't even exposed to what science actually says about the climate, because it's such a hot-button political issue these days. "Keep burning oil to heat your homes, keep making that hideous commute into the city so we don't have to pay you enough to live in the city," they say on one side, "get rid of your car, cover your roof in solar panels, stop eating meat," they screech on the other. Both positions are equally ridiculous.