They are so bad because the science doesn’t support their assertion that CO2 levels cause an increase in temperature, so they try to manipulate their models to support that assertion.
Scientific method demands a hypothesis first. The hypothesis must then be supported by scientific research. If the research does not support the hypothesis it is null and void. "Been there and done that." It kinda sucks to spend hundreds of hours in the lab to prove yourself wrong. Actually I was lucky as my research that proved myself totally wrong proved something else that I did not suspect so all was not wasted
If one changes the parameters of the original hypothesis to fit subsequent data that is scientific fraud.
If one changes the data to fit the original hypothesis that has been proven wrong he is no longer a scientist but a naught more than a damned liar.
They have ample evidence that if the correlation is causation it works the other way. First comes the warming then the oceans release the CO2. Warm water holds less dissolved CO2 than cold water does. Ice cores from everywhere the have pulled ice cores show that the warming precedes the CO2 rise. They are aware of the ice core evidence because there have been a couple of claims by “scientists” that the CO2. It is something that can be verified in any lab and probably has been many times.