I'm seeing an awful lot of closed minds here. Minds which say cyclists doped, cyclists will always dope, all cyclists dope. Minds closed to evidence - minds that actually congratulate their own ignorance - but full of belief in their own worldview.
The reasons to be sceptical are very simple. People cheat to get to the top, especially in hyper competitive environments, and plenty of top riders who we later found out doped never tested positive. Add in basic statistics - a minority of dopers will be highly overrepresented at the very top if doping provides any significant benefit, and it becomes pretty hard for me to believe the biggest outliers in the sport are clean.
To say there's nothing suspicious going on when they're breaking blood bag era records on the most frequently climbed pass in the Tour, and absolutely smashing said record, basically implies there can never be anything suspicious, which I guess could only potentially make sense if you think doping doesn't even work and all variance can be attributed to something else?
Now as for this part
minds that actually congratulate their own ignorance - but full of belief in their own worldview.
Blindly believing the opposite, riders are clean despite decades of the sports history suggesting the contrary, is just magical, religious thinking. It's cleanz because I want to believe, because I have to believe these athletes for no logical cause I've told myself it's important these guys are clean. This includes believing managers and directors who have doped during their careers suddenly having a change of heart and full on cleanz. And if people are skeptical, they must be close minded, prideful in their cynicism and self congratulatory. Suuuuure.
When something looks like ***, smells like ***, and tastes like ***, it's not a unicorn.