Comment 10 by Jos Gibbons

That's funny. All the ones I've encountered have “a science qualification”, like our friend rolan (see below). Now, I suppose they could all be lying, but it's much more charitable to think you and I have experienced very different critics of modern climatology's findings, and that the reason they never say what science the qualification is in is because “half a dozen of one, six of the other”.

I was talking about the public at large, rather than the minority with science qualifications. Your point about qualifications in the wrong subjects (having diverted study away from relevant ones) is a good point. I have a friend who is a denier, who has a PhD in chemical engineering. He is also the retired manager of a coking plant, so will have been studying literature from the coal industry, - probably to the exclusion of other subjects.

It is important to know one's limitations and recognise the limitations of others. You will see that I usually leave the physics to the consensus of physicists, although as a biologist, I am well aware of the effects of global warming, a changing climate, and the bio-mechanisms they trigger.