prepared to accept what seems like dogma being rammed down their throats? But this campaign has had a long enough run (eight years) and its clearly failed, and will continue to fail. Perhaps the Dutch have an approach that will work - either way, with a swing to CAGW belief or the opposite. However, I can't for a moment see any change of tack at the BBC or the MET Office. If the submissions are of scant worth, but the public discourse has been so suborned to reading trash on the subject (biomedical research), then this "new journal" is just an(other) indication that the rot has advanced further there than it has in climate science -- no one is left to speak the truth, of how little is actually known, and how bad the underlying theory is, which everyone takes for granted as fact, so they do not fear making the biomedical propaganda machine more transparent. I would suggest the interested reader of that journal look out for papers on models, rather than experiments, being run.