Thanks for recounting that unique history of yours Rebecca, I am sorry to hear your deplorable treatment by some UK academic establishments.
My own background which includes industrial and academic research has brought me to researching what I call the global energy problem. I do this from PhD candidate work on virtual worlds, realising it's a problem affecting both virtual and real worlds, but in the real world it's existential.
To me it's becoming apparent that we, all of humanity, function by a system of energy slavery, which is actually destroying the planet.
We do this systemically mostly without realising it.
We have hierarchies of authority which funnel ever increasing amounts of energy away from the poorer places and poorer people.
This is energy colonialism.
In all cases the higher levels of authority control the lower levels by enforcement of energy scarcity, only supplying energy when the lower levels are "doing what they are told".
At the root of it all is profit which is technically an energy lie.
All energy in all profit has to have come extracted from the planet and this is the real reason for temperature rise, the temperature is a direct measure of increasing entropy which is destruction by definition.
The arguments that CO2 is the problem by creating a blanket, is just a mask, a red herring, a sales pitch, by which yet more profit can be made, since science and academia themselves also depend on profit, therefore we see there a huge conflict of interest.
The atmosphere is adiabatic, so there can be no blanket.
So the temperature is a measure of destruction, and at the root of this is profit.
My own observations of Gaza prior to the destruction of it by Israel, was that it had visibly much more solar panels on the roofs of the buildings there.
Knowing also Israel insisted on controlling the utilities energy in and out of Gaza, as well as pretty much everything, and knowing the Gazans would have had to cross the turnstiles every day into Gaza, to do the low paid work they needed to do, to pay their bills, we can see there would be a motivation to install as much solar as they could to become energy independent from Israel.
This explains the high proportion of solar on the roofs of Gaza, as it was.
I estimate they were maybe close to 70% independent, compared with maybe 30% independence of the public in developed countries due to domestic and community solar.
When we do the math, this is a much bigger deal than most folk realise, it's large amounts of business (profit as always) lost by the utilities energy companies, and all the businesses worked for at low rates by Gazan people in Israel.
70% energy independence would have reflected directly more or less as 70% less folk crossing the turnstiles to do work for Israel.
This would have looked to the Israelis like the Gazans getting lazy, but actually it was the Gazans slipping out of the energy slavery loop.
This is what it looks like to me.
I wonder what your thoughts would be on that?