Actually it was my guest post:
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/02/18/the-carbon-brief-the-european-rapid-response-team/#more-34193

A four page flier on wind turbines came in with my milk cheque yesterday full of the usual nonsense with no down sides mentioned at all. I have to be farm assured to produce milk , meat and grain, working in as environmentally friendly way as is reasonably possible. Does anyone else feel that these wind turbines are incompatible with these goals.
John Lyon

Cumbrian Lad

I heard that as well and laughed out aloud, but later in the interview both parties agreed that it was incorrect government data that the statistics were based upon.

Did anyone hear Prof Acton of UEA on the radio this morning wittering on about the plans to limit visas to students who may not be genuine? He'd just produced a report to claim that the impending new rules will drastically effect the finances of the universities, but the other chap on that segment challenged his statistics and the conclusions of the report. He's not having much luck with reports, or stats, is he.

Andrew, Anthony has a piece on a new climate site that is referencing you:
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2011/02/18/the-carbon-brief-the-european-rapid-response-team/#more-34193

You are included in several posts, this one in particular, last paragraph:
http://www.carbonbrief.org/profiles/hockey-stick

Another Johnny Ball link
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1358139/Climate-zealots-life-hell-sceptic-says-Johnny-Ball-victim-porn-blog-smears.html?ITO=1490

Johnny Ball 'abused by environmentalists' over climate change denial

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/science/science-news/8330836/Johnny-Ball-abused-by-environmentalists-over-climate-change-denial.html

Wow, the MSM are changing allegiance a couple of years ago we would have never of heard about this.

Hilary
Unfortunately blog polling can introduce bias. Even if it didn't it would be accused of it. A further thought. Going back to the Doran paper and the slant put on it, it was based on Zimmerman's thesis. That may contain a lot more than was stated in the paper, and if you are seriously investigating the topic, researching that may be revealing and rewarding. Just a pure guess though.

Dreadnought:

What a wonderful site! A practical solution to the terrible guilt all right-thinking Australians must feel when they venture into the bush with their iPood toilet trowels. And a proprietor who writes that she has "always been conscience of global warming and the threat it holds for mankind and all creaturers of this planet"[sic]. Only the cost of Oz-UK shipping inhibited me from ordering 96 rolls.

@Pharos Feb 16, 2011 at 10:06 AM

Thanks, Pharos ...

The Doran survey fails to disclose the full poll results. See my post Feb 15, 2011 at 9:38 PM on the Beddington on Warpath thread.

Oh, I know! And, yes, I did see your post yesterday ... as well as Sam at Climatequotes' excellent analysis earlier this month (see link in background to my survey). Sam had posed the question "What would an ideal survey look like?" which "inspired" my survey - in which I've chosen to focus on the specific hypothesis of C02 as primary culprit - as well as attempting to determine if there are scientists who might be better at "communicating with the general public" on the matter of "global warming" than ... oh, I dunno ... Mann, Jones, Steig, Schmidt, Ward - or even Beddington - for example ;-)

I'm fully aware that my survey is far from "scientific" and has the inherent bias of self-selection, but I thought it would be helpful to have some quantifiable "data" (from scientists free from the influence of any institutional inhibitions!) on these particular issues as a starting point!

Traffic at my particular corner of the blogosphere is very quiet but my (probably very ambitious!) goal is to have responses from 1500 scientists of any and all "persuasions". FWIW, since the survey page was "published" [Feb. 15 4:30 p.m. PDT], I've received 4 responses from 23 "page views" (far from "significant", but not a bad return rate, eh?!). The responses to the free-form question (on "communication with the general public") have been quite thoughtful.

In light of my goal, I'm trying to cast a net far and wide ... so please forgive me for repeating:

Calling all scientists - an invitation to speak for yourself!

Who knows ... if the results are interesting enough maybe "Big Oil" will send me my cheque which could be used to fund a genuine scientific survey, worthy of publication in a "peer-reviewed" journal ;-)

But at the very least, perhaps Donna might give it some mention in her forthcoming book ... or perhaps there will be enough material for me to write my own book!

Hilary