Let's paraphrase this and you'll see what's been going on:
"Climetologists and meteorologists who have evaluated those who disagree with human caused Climate change have rejected them because their work does not match the observations of global warming and climate change phenomena as well as current climatological theory. Very few papers opposing Climate change/global warming have appeared in the literature since the mid-1990s."
Do you see what a circular argument Wikipedia's editor posted? There ARE no peer-reviewed articles on plasma/Electric Universe challenges to the orthodox theory because the orthodoxy will not allow "such twaddle" in their view to see the light of day that might upset their gravy train. Do you know how many billions of dollars are being spent on fusion research based on the assurances that the sun is a "stable fusion reactor?"
I.E. you cannot get published unless you toe the orthodox theory line. Nor, Sargon can you get observatory time (preciously expensive), grant money, or tenure if you challenge orthodoxy, even if you are making accurate predictions on what will be observed and found. Iconoclasts in any orthodox structure are ousted because they make waves and say that the hoary honored names GOT IT WRONG and that everything you thought you knew was wrong!
If what that Wikipedia citation states were true, why is it that with every single new discovery in space, an article describing it begins "cosmologists, astronomers, and astrophysicists were (surprised, shocked, thunderstruck, etc., insert your choice here) at the findings of the (blank) when . . . " while the Electric Universe cosmologist and astrophysicists, who are ALSO scientists, had often specifically predicted what so ( surprised, shocked, thunderstruck, etc.,) the orthodox scientist who were not at all expecting such a thing. I can cite you dozens of such things.
You did not address even a single one of the challenges I put to you. Instead you appealed to authority with Wikipedia which trots out ancient history from before the X-ray telescope.
Try applying YOUR brain. Please use some critical thinking and see if YOU can conceive of any way mono-polar gravity can construct that Butterfly Nebula with such exact symmetry. Keep in mind it HAS been duplicated in a plasma laboratory in the microcosm. . . and that these effects are linearly scalable by the simple means of just adding more power. Ramp up the power and they get far bigger! One of the tests of a theory is duplicateability. Plasma/electric Universe passed that test. Gravity Universe cannot. It cannot even pass the explicable math test.
That's one of the things that has made me laugh at folks who think the standard models accurately describe the way the universe really works. Every single planet in the solar system is deeply different in fundamental ways from each other. Astronomers sometimes seem like me to be like sheep who are surprised at the sun rising each morning. Every time I read the phrase "dark matter" or "dark energy" I chuckle.