I’m always dumbfounded at the reactions I see to this sort of news, the kind never reported in the mainstream media (which might be a clue to the diminishing status). Most real scientists (and by that, I mean credentialed) denounce most of the tripe associated with the environmental "sciences," and the "science" behind the Kyoto Protocols is no exception.
The "problem" is similar to that with the creation vs. evolution (superstition vs. science) debate. Real scientists don’t waste their time trying to debunk superstitious nonsense in the case of creation "theory," or politicized "science" based on logical fallacies and subjective observation in the case of environmentalism.
And before I’m accused of employing the fallacy of the No True Scotsman in this case, I’m not. The definition of science precludes both the faith of creation and the faith of environmentalism (disguised as science).