Been away for a few days and came across your propaganda piece on Peiser incidentally.
I was aware of Peiser's qualifications and interests but used "polemic license" to make the point that research should be judged by it's quality and not it's source.
My purpose in introducing Peiser was to indicate that there were dissenting (not particularly his) views on the cause of global climate change. My challenge to you was to consider the integrity of the research after I noticed that you too were, in the main, pasting propaganda type stuff from newspaper "science" writers rather than giving a rational critique of the research, conclusions and ideas of the “natural” global warming experts
Peiser is, I would suggest, adequately qualified to read and evaluate the scientific literature and make what is most probably a better assessment of the pro and contra scientific research and theories, than one who is totally committed to one side or the other.
“Benny is a Fellow of the Royal Astronomical Society and a spokesperson for Spaceguard UK. He is a member of the Study Group on Earth-Threatening Asteroids & Comets of the International Academy of Astronautics (IAA). Benny the founder and moderator of one of the most successful electronic science networks, the Cambridge Conference Network, which includes more than 1,200 subscribers from around the world. It is in this capacity that a 10km-wide asteroid, Minor Planet (7107) Peiser, was named in his honour by the International Astronomical Union.
Academic qualifications:PhD (Johann Wolfgang Goethe Universität, Frankfurt am Main, Germany)
Dr Benny Peiser is a social anthropologist with particular research interest in human and cultural evolution.”
His fluency in science surely makes him eminently qualified to make an assessment of the literature with respect to the causes of global climate change.
My own prognosis is that we shall, perhaps in the lifetime of some of us, see that global warming, as a result of human activity has occurred or is in fact a giant hoax. I would suggest that because of national short-term interests we will see few of the measures touted to reduce green house gases, being fully implemented.
