It is pertinent to reveal a persons funding and employment/affiliations, and to suspect bias as a result. While his data may be valid my eyes roll up in my head if I hear a person is a conspiracy theorist and such. Much of the AGW stuff is likewise financed by those that way inclined, it could certainly be affecting the result.

I’d like to see a bit more definitive before I label Dr. Morner though, was his academic record also suspect, or just the fact that he has some theories on dowsing?