Read here, here, here, here, and here. Over the last week, AGW climate science has again been rocked by bogus data and dubious scientific techniques that have raised serious questions of fraud or huge incompetence. The paleo-climate studies in question were all peer-reviewed, which raises serious questions about the entire peer-review process.
The collection of links above indicate a serious peer-review problem that exists at the majority of publications that publish climate science studies. Based on the fraudulent studies over the last decade, it would be reasonable to conclude that one can't put too much faith in AGW-oriented studies that have been "peer-reviewed. More.
I cant really gove you an answer,but what I can give you is a way to a solution, that is you have to find the anglde that you relate to or peaks your interest. A good paper is one that people get drawn into because it reaches them ln some way.As for me WW11 to me, I think of the holocaust and the effect it had on the survivors, their families and those who stood by and did nothing until it was too late.