Yes, for some scientists to learn: avoid dissemination of catastrophic alarmist results if they don't have an extremely solid basis. 10-year linear trends? WTF?
Given what is known, and worse, what is not known about climate change, any climate scientist not being alarmist has succumbed to fear. Climate change is real. Climate change is worse than predictions. Abrupt climate change is very likely.
The lack of alarmism produces inaction.
Many deniers nowadays are using to discredit AGW claims from the 80's that were based on worst case scenarios and that did not come to happen.
Deniers say NASA is lying about the temperature data set. Deniers take the painstaking and rigorous work of revising data and makes it look like fraud to anyone not versed in science (95% of people). There is nothing you can say that cowardly deniers won't twist for their own cowardly purposes.
What you should be worried about is giving the world the best risk assessment possible and the best science possible regardless of what others may think. That is very difficult, specially for people of science.
Slow climate change proponents are giving the world the wrong risk assessment.
Fattening career and fame with +3sigma claims as baseline. As reckless as denier scientists paid with gold by the Cato Institute
What scientist is "fattening" their career? Scientist that make alarmists predictions are immediately shunned by peers and the media, just like you are doing here. People don't want to hear that our world is ending unless we make significant changes to how we lead our lives. Scientists are people and they suffer the same defect* as people do. They don't want to talk about the end of our world.
I find alarmist scientists absolutely reckless.
I find scientists that pretend "everything is ok, nothing to worry about until 2100" absolutely reckless. Although "scientists" may not be the best way to describe them. The whole "climate change will be slow" theory has no basis in science. Zero. Nada. Climate change at the scale humans are producing is unprecedented. Any claim of safety is pure speculation. Bad speculation at that. Past mass extinction happened over thousands of years. What we are doing to Earth is happening over decades.
Your Conservatism is fake science.
Fortunately most of scientists take a more humble, more rigorous approach, something that is seen by some in forums like this as "coward" "staying in an ivory tower" "irresponsible" "slow science supports deniers" etc etc
They are not being rigorous. They are supposing a stable climate as a given and ignoring evidence that is scary.
*Defect only in terms of security and correct risk assesment. In terms of everyday life, denying the fragility of our world and the impact we are having on it is a feature that keeps us sane. Climate scientist do not have the choice of double blind experimentation.