Perhaps not corrupt - in the sense of being dishonest for personal gain: there is no evidence either way at this time. But definitely not a scientist, for which we have abundant evidence.
A scientist believes in having quality data on which to found theories. Chu believes in only those weather stations that show temperature increases - every one of them due to non-weather forces (air conditioners, jet exhausts, paving over of grass, etc.). A scientist believes in quality analysis. Chu believes in computer models that have no relation to reality - they cannot "predict" the past, much less the present or the future.