Maybe they are too busy doing sciency things than write articles in right leaning magazines? (You mean Quadrant leans to the right? I'm shocked)
You may be surprised to know many scientists are not that great at public speaking or TV interviews. However, you seem to be taken by a smooth talking peer, can I sell you a monorail? Shelbyville has one!
You fall into the same trap as Bob, dismissing an argument because of where it is published.
Whether Matt Ridley is a smooth talking peer I have no idea, never having heard him speak.
But we need people like him, as well as people from all shades of political thought, to keep an eye on what the scientists are doing.
You seem to have a touching faith in the integrity of scientists that is close to quasi-religious.
Martyn, I have written that people on the left tend to have a bias towards believing climate change. People on the right have a bias against. You seem to assume that everyone on who disagrees with you has fallen for this bias, whereas you are immune.
The science is not politics however. The people doing the science, regardless of their politics, have a consensus and that is that it is real. I have no interest in Jeremy Corbyn's stance on climate science anymoer that I am concerned with Ryan Gigg's opinion on cake baking. I would not declare Jeremy Corbyn a scientific visionary for agreeing with me.
No, but I don't dismiss someone's opinions based solely on whether I happen to believe whether they fall on the right or the left of the political spectrum.
I'm no expert, but I can only make judgements on what I read, and as I said earlier I accept that humans play a significant role in climate change, but that the dangers that flow from that are uncertain.