Comment by Braxton1980

Unless you have other evidence that this particular report is exaggerating without justification you can't solely rely on the fact that their opinions/results would benefit them as evidence they are providing misinformation.

It's possible for information to be factual and opinions to be justified from a source while that source also benefits from the information/opinions existing.

I can easily provide counter examples from countless situations that occur each year.

----

If you feel that all scientists and researchers have a lower level of trust because of negative actions of some, that's wrong of course because their reputations aren't connected, but you try to confirm it. For example, find out if a cooler than normal El Nino season would help coral feeds (or whatever)

What you did was tell us you don't trust the information, not because of something specific, but a concept/rule you believe.

Considering you originally misrepresented their findings, perhaps by accident, you should have done more to make your case.