"This thread is about Wiggins." Without his team, Wiggins would not have won, this thread can not discuss Wiggins without discussing his team.
"No proof, no evidence"? Shucks, buddy, there's no proof and no evidence of 99% of the doping cases we know today happened. We have hearsay mostly - people telling stories. It just so happens that they are mostly the same stories, which gives them weight. In the case of Sky this year - Wiggins had a blood test earlier this year that an anti-doping expert said he thought suspicious. We also have uncommonly strong performances, that initially reminded everybody of the dominance of another historical team that was doping. For that matter, we could extend that "dominance" theory to Indurain, and find some similarity there, as well.
Until we get better testing, there is plenty of reason for suspicion. We hear conflicting evidence given by members of the peloton - so who do we believe? The guy who says things are getting pretty clean, or the guy who says the needle is still an essential part of the pro's diet?
I may be suspicious, but I find in retrospect that things may indeed be "cool". If this continues for a few years, and we don't see people getting popped who say they are clean - maybe I will watch a Tour without that nagging doubt in the back of my mind. Remember, I've been lied to for a LONG time - 2 decades now. And you have been lied to for that long also.