The key is the last item in the article:

“This is a resistance to decrees which they think undermine competitive Swedish agricultural production,”

The researcher has probably never spent time on a farm. She apparently had a stereotype of farmers as victims of big industry helplessly struggling to live in harmony with nature in the face of changing climate. In real life farmers are industry - the agricultural industry. They work very hard to maintain a farm, a farm being something radically out of balance with nature. Unless the laws and 'free' 'trade' agreements change to alter their economic incentives, their focus will be on their immediate, short-term economic situation and whatever mythology is tied up with their understanding of those economics.

The telling part is "Or at least that these are not triggered by human activities." If the climate is changing, then the question of the cause is the first part of finding a solution, but the problem does not magically become less serious depending on who or what the cause is. Someone who goes off-topic about human activities is trying - poorly - to rationalize their denial.

Because we all know that all programmers do is follow the requirements document from the client, which never requires any clarification/investigation/analysis/follow-up/etc.

The really well-known medals like Victoria Cross / Congressional Medal are not awarded for merely doing your job, but there are medals for all sorts of things.

Simply being in a combat zone, regardless of the actual task one is doing, is more dangerous and requires more courage than anything most people will do in their entire life, and merits recognition of a certain degree.

Phogiston (thermal energy) and the luminiferous aether (space-time geometry) are real. It was the materials science metaphors that were wrong.

Occupy Wall Street was based on the observation that Wall Street was a crime scene.

The other "occupy" events, not held at crime scenes, destroyed the message. Exactly what Wall Street wanted.

You answered your own question.

They go through the different versions until they reach the one that convinces their target audience, and as a last resort fall back on economic reality.

And of course it's dishonest.

Patent application:

<insert well-known invention here> made of graphene!

$640 000 should be enough for anyone.

A large number of people off-topic are still off-topic.

When the rest of the planet tells Americans that they are arrogant, this is exactly the sort of thing we're talking about.

...eventually, but children do not start out that way.

Hypocrisy is contradictory by definition. The double standard offends people.

It's not hypocritical to admit to a poor judgment and cautioning others about making the same mistake.

Of course, the advice itself isn't necessarily bad just because it's hypocritical.

Most hypocrites do not realize that everyone else considers hypocrisy a bad thing.

There are a few, and researchers and historians would like to have them on computer.

The FCC is there to regulate *consumer*, not industry.

Regulating pick-ups at the airport at least makes a kind of sense, as the airport has the authority to regulate commerce occurring on its property. Whether the fees involved are justified is of course a separate question.

But if you've hired someone to take you *to* the airport, once you're on the airport property it's a little late for the airport to do anything about it.