I know that and many reports used are not peer reviewed. And what does peer review means if peers themselves don't know? I remember Hawking's theory was widely peer reviewed and accepted, however he was forced to admit decades later that his theory was incorrect. Hawking's persona has been constructed and marketed, his story manipulated and controlled, for the purpose of his own glorification and selling his book, and this has occurred, as it could only occur, with his cooperation or at least acquiescence. Many scientists do have their own agenda, being it glorification or or for monetary reasons.
Quote:
|
The scientific community is a self-correcting system with an expansive web of checks and balances.
|
To be correct, one has to be sure what's right and as far as I know re global warming everything is still out.