Then you should read what scientists write, not science journalists You can read both. In this case science journalists are both explaining the science (quite

Then you should read what scientists write, not science journalists You can read both. In this case science journalists are both explaining the science (quite well, in this case) and also alledging bad behaviour by scientists, and if he's right (which again, seems to be the case given the evidence presented) then only reading what those very same scientists have written would leave you less well informed.