Thanks for the responses

To everyone who has contributed to this both on Climate Etc and on my blog to the article sceptics vs. academics (now sceptics vs. non-sceptics), I would like to thank EVERYONE for their contributions.
Unfortunately, given the huge volume of comments I cannot hope to respond to everyone personally. To give an example of the quality of responses, I have been selecting passages that seemed notable and put them into a list. I am only a fraction of the way through and on my fourth page of notes.
Many support my working hypothesis that there is something in the culture, training or our work experience that causes us to interpret the evidence differently but that hypothesis has also been challenged by many comments which also seem to have merit and need proper consideration.
So, it will take time to process the comments.
My conclusions so far are:

1. Although the table was far from perfect (particularly on the description on the non-sceptic side), it does seem to encapsulate some real differences supported by many respondents.
2. There are several other avenues of investigation which need to be considered which do not fit neatly into the table.
3. This soft information needs to be backed up with hard stats. Therefore after I have had time to consider the responses I intend to find a way to obtain hard stats, probably by an on-line survey. I appreciate this will be difficult so I need to seek advice.
4. I was hoping to update the table as I went along but I have been overwhelmed by the number of response so this has not been possible. Therefore when I have read all the responses I shall update the table and put a copy on my blog and here if Judith permits.

Thanks