Abstract
The discourse on scientists' involvement in climate advocacy has intensified, with a growing number participating in civil disobedience. This trend has sparked criticism within the academic community. We conducted 47 interviews with climate scientists about the fundamental concerns that underpin their arguments. Scientists worry that advocacy may compromise scientific impartiality and invite allegations of biased science and abuse of authority. Despite this, some scientists view informing and warning the public as their duty and as an act of defending science's credibility. Concerns about independence and the role of scientists in society exist at both ends of the debate, underscoring the challenging landscape scientists currently navigate. While this article does not comment on the acceptability of advocacy, we propose that scientists engage in discussions about their duties and delineate the types of values deemed acceptable for incorporation in science communication about climate change.