re: Okay. I'm the problem here.
You seem to be pursuing a strategy of obfuscation to try to discredit climate change scientists. I offer one concrete, easily defined, easily seen, downright obvious motive for lying: Protection of corporate profits. And your response is to list a constellation of vague and impossible to prove hypotheticals, like hunger for fame, political partisanship, and anti-Americanism, seasoned with the guilt-by-association tactic of citing the Korean scientist caught falsifying his results.
I think I've made my point. It meets the standards of Occam's Razor, and really doesn't need any further defense.