How "settled" science is performed

This is a blast from the past, but is strangely current:

For over a century, Einstein’s theory of relativity has been one of the unimpeachable pillars of science, so much so that the statement “nothing is faster than light” is often taken as a simple fact of life. It is a theory upon which much of modern physics is based.
Several weeks ago, scientists in Europe came across something they shouldn’t have:

…They had measured particles called neutrinos which traveled around six kilometers (3.75 miles) per second faster than the speed of light, determined by Einstein to be the highest velocity possible.

Further experimentation gave similar results.  This doesn't mean that relativity is wrong but it does suggest that what was "settled" physics is less well understood than we had thought.

What’s interesting, of course, is how much more mature physicists seem to be than climatologists.  Dissent from a scientific paradigm much more firmly established than anything in climate science isn’t greeted with howls of rage, fury and charges of heresy.  Many physicists are skeptical, as well they should be, of evidence that seems contrary to decades of experiment and analysis, but the overwhelming mood seems to be one of curiosity rather than rage.  Could these new results possibly be real?  What would this mean if it is true?  How can we check these results to see how fast these neutrinos are really moving?

This is how real science operates.

Physicists don't "hide the decline".  This tells you everything that you need to know to understand just how pitifully weak climate "science" is today.