On 20/01/2018 08:34, Chris Hogg wrote:
On Sat, 20 Jan 2018 08:19:10 +0000, RJH wrote:


I have to accept that very few 'climate deniers' on this NG will read,
much less accept, peer reviewed work by trained scientists. But
blog-watching, the Daily Mail and hunches. Really?


I have to accept that very few 'climate alarmists' on this NG will
read, much less accept, peer reviewed work by trained scientists who
hold alternative views (and there are plenty of them).


Ouch :-)

I'm not an alarmist - I certainly wouldn't present my view on
anthropogenic climate change as fact, link to very dubious sources to
support anything I say, or claim any expertise.

Anyhoo, meta-reviews are putting the ratio as, at very best 10:1
(supporter: denier). And of those deniers that I've read, and do manage
to scrape through to publication, are usually discredited pretty quickly
and retract.

--
Cheers, Rob