> I do think that Azimuth posts should bear the name of the author at the very beginning. Currently one has to scroll down or even expand a post in order to see this “posted by”

Well, usually it's half clear from the style who it is, and I think we want to draw more attention to the message than to who actually posted it.

> And I think there is a point to this. Of course there is something as “scientific evidence” and one should hope that scientists are as neutral as possible when it comes to “evidence”. However the fiercer the academic competition gets the more this may get “challenged”.

If you're talking about job offers or publications, my impression (I'm working in Earth Sciences) is that this would be nonsense. As far as I know no jobs are assigned on the basis "how much do you believe in AGW". Of course too much academic competition may sometimes lead to hurried research and not-so-good papers, but bad papers can be written by skeptics as well as by AGW believers (or people pretending to believe, if you're hinting at that). In fact, I've seen more bad papers written by skeptics (maybe because these circulate more fiercely on the net).

Furthermore, I think that most earth scientist scientists (those who do not directly work on climate change themselves to be aware of every fine point) do the most "scientifically rational" in these matters, they simply trust what the majority of the experts claims and not discuss about the subjects they don't know enough about to go into every fine point.