One of the tools I find useful in considering issues is to follow a common mathematician's approach -- called the reductio ad absurdum. That means reduction to absurdity. What you do is assume the thing at hand to be true, and then pursue it logically to see where you go -- whether it leads you to absurdity. This is also the starting point for a proof by contradiction. Again, assume the thing to be true and see if it leads logically to a conclusion that contradicts what you know to be true.
So let's assume that there is indeed a fake involved in the decline in Arctic sea ice. The people involved were a little particular -- the passive microwave sea ice record.
Some questions to pursue, then:
- How long would the conspiracy have to have lasted?
- How much data would have to be faked?
- Who all would have to be involved in the fakery?
- Are there other sources of data to confirm or refute the passive microwave observations?