His constant smiling is facade to hide pain inside him. His judgmental comments reveal masked pettiness, a nasty character flaw for someone posing as science popularizer.

He still speaks with voice of truth most of the time. However, he has still some growing up to do, wisdom to be gained. He is pretending be beyond his evolution.

When he says “of course there is no problem with vaccination”, we can hear the same zeal what can be hear with his ‘opponents’. He has his religion, astrology community have their religion. Brian is just more functional, more aware.

I wonder whether Damian Carrington at the Guardian will bother to post a correction to his earlier article:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2009/jan/21/global-warming-antarctica

Unlikely, as the correction would contradict the scare story.

You should watch Brian Cox in the next episode of the lecture. Perhaps his experience of peer review in physics is different from that of many other areas of science – where reviewers are not always independent, more like pal review. Striking examples are found in the climategate emails (if you trouble yourself to read them in their proper context). For another example, just read this recent post on Steve McIntyre’s blog.