As of April 17, 2008, it says this:
"The debate on Peiser's critique of Oreskes' essay continues, with some pointing to a letter that Peiser submitted to the Australian Media Watch that indicated that Peiser no longer maintains one of his criticisms, and that he no longer doubts that "an overwhelming majority of climatologists is agreed that the current warming period is mostly due to human impact ... (h)owever, this majority consensus is far from unanimous", as evidence that Peiser is stepping back from his comments and conclusions on Oreskes' essay.[7] More recently, in an article in the National Post [1], a Canadian national newspaper[2], Peiser indicates that he did not retract his critique of Oreskes' paper, despite certain references to the contrary, and that he stands firmly by his initial position on Oreskes [8]. The article further claims that Peiser's views are being miscommunicated and that Peiser's comments are being distorted by environmentalists that are keen to discredit Peiser in order to reduce the impact that Peiser's work has had on the credibility of Oreskes' essay."
Tabletop, you’re back...