I think you need to read my original post more closely. I am suggesting that certain scientists can't get their articles published and widely discussed in public.
So they are published (how the hell would I know about them if they weren't published? I thought that much was obvious, but the intrepid alarmist will snap at anything. How I could only possibly know something was not being discussed if that something was not in the public domain ready to be discussed? I'm not hacking private servers here). My point is, however, they are rarely discussed or, to my knowledge, decisively refuted. That Obama has been given space in journals is beyond debate - but you decide for yourself.
So in relation to your "yes yes" comments, does that mean you agree, or is your role to just block the conversation with word games?
