After the disaster unleashed by the climategate e-mails, will the population ever really trust "peer review"?
2009-12-10T20:55:37Z
Trevor, The nature trick was Mann tacking on surface temp data onto his tree ring data BECAUSE the tree ring data from 1960 onward went DOWN. Seems to me, in science, if 40 years of your data does not closely tie to actual data, the entire data series gets scrapped. But then, dishonest people do not really care about science.
How about Jones asking others to DELETE data? Seriosly, are you really trying to support these clowns? Or, how about them playing with the peer review process in general? Gee, is it just me, or does that sound like people with something to hide? I hate to tell you, but trying to support these guys is really pathetic.
2009-12-10T20:57:08Z
Pegminer, How about allowing all people access to the data? Mann and his cronies have been hiding for years. Or do you think maybe they have a reason to hide the data?
2009-12-10T20:59:27Z
Beren, Now, the things us "skeptics" have been saying is proven to be true. The climate science cabal has been cherry picking data and having close associates perform the peer review. Common on, any reasonable person whoes head is not stuck in the sand knows there is something inherently wrong with this. hey, how do you get all that sand out of your hair?
Starbuck2009-12-10T17:55:27Z
Favorite Answer
It will be a long haul to get respect back into science after being kidnapped by the liberal left these past years. Contrary to what you are hearing from those alarmists that pretend to be someone they are not, there is a war going on between scientists and their agendas right now in specific areas of study. These areas center around environmentalism and the activists that have infiltrated government agencies with poorly trained scientists from the activism side of environmentalism.
It is happening a many scientists have had it with the slander and libel going on in their profession and many are afraid to speak up in fear of the political pressure and repercussions they will receive.
Liberals hijacked science folks for their twisted liberal agenda. Good luck all of you.
If deniers care so little approximately consensus why did they bypass to the effort of bobbing up petition after petition to purpose and instruct that they have got consensus, if certainty be told peer evaluate is the final occasion of consensus and the argument that deniers are being blocked 'via some conspiracy' is rubbish because of the fact there are dozens of journals and each has a distinct set of editor and reviewers that's 1000's of people, deniers won't be able to get printed for the essential reason they are able to't help their claims in a actual technological know-how paper. Dana it incredibly is all of the thrill on numerous different boards I bypass to that Monbiot has fooled those denier-bots with a pretend digital mail that replaced into no longer area of the stolen ones and that they fell for it hook line and stinker.
It will be a long haul to get respect back into science after being kidnapped by the liberal left these past years. Contrary to what you are hearing from those Darwinists that pretend to be someone they are not, there is a war going on between scientists and their agendas right now in specific areas of study. These areas center around evolutionism and the activists that have infiltrated government agencies with poorly trained scientists from the activism side of evolutionism.
It is happening a many scientists have had it with the slander and libel going on in their profession and many are afraid to speak up in fear of the political pressure and repercussions they will receive.
Liberals hijacked science folks for their twisted liberal agenda. Good luck all of you.
Not that they ever should. Peer review may be a good idea, but if you include the profit motive it falls apart. Money changes everything, and that includes the "scientific" community. They want their piece of the pie and there is a lot of money to be made off of this hoax.
The truth of it is that any body that makes it to PHD level did it because there are no jobs available for undergrads in their field or they are social misfits that nobody would hire. Gates and Jobs aren't scientists, but they are a whole lot smarter than the losers that couldn't get a real job.
Will the population trust peer review? Are you kidding? 95% of the population has no idea what peer review is. I know that virtually none of the deniers understand it. If people don't like peer review, I say suggest something else. Peer review definitely has problems, I've experienced them myself, but the only alternative I've seen is publishing on blogs, and that seems even worse to me.
By the way peer review and the scientific method refer to two different things which are neither in conflict nor alternatives.
EDIT: One answer gives libertarianism a bad name by his completely unsupported and ridiculous opinion of Ph.D.s. Did he perhaps get turned down for a Ph.D. program? Or perhaps college entirely? And he must never have heard of a little company called Intel, founded by a couple of Ph.D.s
Another EDIT: Sure, I'm for access to the data. In fact I don't know of another field of science that has so much free access to data as atmospheric science does. In my research I'm constantly amazed that I can download terabytes of data for free. If you read more of the emails than the 5 or 6 that have been publicized by deniers, you'll find that they already felt that they had given McIntyre all the data needed to check their work. The talk about deleting data is the result of someone being pushed to the breaking point by a pest, but that is wrong.
I should point out, though, that that is NOT what you asked about--that was not peer review, although you may think it is. Peer review is the specific process that takes place when an article is submitted to a journal, not just random review by peers.