I'll read this later, but....
...and re: the bias thing I've read about in various threads. True various scientists are supported by varoius lobbys.
My thought is: It's not like these guys were sitting around doing nothing and some industry lobbyist came up and said, 'psst, heybud, wanna make some money? Go out and prove my side!' I think these guys were already working in the field and, like Gray back in 1984, had work that supported one side or the other and that is how they got noticed to be funded.
I don't think Gray, back then, know what his data showed (had no agenda). [I'm referring tothe thread about 'name calling' in Colorado].
And I don't think most scientists would compromise their research based on some preconceived notion of what it is supposed to show. I'm sure there is pressure from above, but....
???
~samwik
