I’m not an atmospheric scientist, but sustainability is part of my work and my academic field. NOAA is not my go to organization for climate science, and it’s bad if someone there “fiddled” with data under the Obama administration.
It’s good and normal that people disagree with scientific consensus. People who understand how science works do not become disillusioned by anecdotes like the case of Dr. Fleming. But you might confuse people who don’t understand science, and cause them to lose trust in their institutions and experts.
I respect your intention, but I don’t think you are accomplishing what you setting out to do.
The science of climate change is also scientific evidence for impermanence; that the basic systems that supports our lives are liable to change and disappear. The Buddha made similar points about the impermanence of the environment in an7.66.
Your approach may actually stop people from reflecting on impermanence, and instead create distrust towards scientists and science in general.