« Friday Night is Music Night (RIP Blues Edition) | Main | Green Back Laundering »

Climate Pravda

BBC News - Journal editor resigns over 'problematic' climate paper

By Richard Black
Environment correspondent, BBC News

The paper, by US scientists Roy Spencer and William Braswell, claimed that computer models of climate inflated projections of temperature increase....and the rate at which the Earth radiated heat into space.
The paper, published in July, was swiftly attacked by scientists in the mainstream of climate research.
They also commented on the fact that the paper was not published in a journal that routinely deals with climate change. Remote Sensing's core topic is methods for monitoring aspects of the Earth from space.

Such as "the rate at which the Earth radiated heat into space"?

Dr Spencer is a committed Christian as well as a professional scientist

obviously guilty then

Scientific papers that turn out to be flawed or fraudulent are usually retracted by the journals that publish them, with editorial resignations a rarity.
But Bob Ward, policy and communications director at the Grantham Research Institute on Climate Change and the Environment at the London School of Economics, said Dr Wagner had done the decent thing.
"I think it remains to be seen whether the authors follow a similar course."
Mr Ward described the tactic of publishing in off-topic journals as a "classic tactic" of scientists dismissive of man-made climate change.
"Those who recognise that their ideas are weak but seek to get them into the literature by finding weaknesses in the peer review system are taking a thoroughly disreputable approach," he said.

Weakness in the pal peer review system, who ever heard of such a thing?

Dr Spencer is one of the team at the University of Alabama in Huntsville that keeps a record of the Earth's temperature as determined from satellite readings.
He is also on the board of directors of the George C Marshall Institute, a right-wing thinktank critical of mainstream climate science, and an advisor to the Cornwall Alliance for the Stewardship of Creation, an evangelical Christian organisation that claims policies to curb climate change "would destroy jobs and impose trillions of dollars in costs" and "could be implemented only by enormous and dangerous expansion of government control over private life".

Double obviously guilty then.

In other news several journal editors have admitted their errors in Stalin's Russia for not recognising that Lysenko was the only authority on genetics. They happily renounced their mistakes as they were lead away to be re-educated. New editors have been appointed by the party the state broadcaster announced.


Interestingly the debate has gone "viral" on this paper, one can only speculate that it threatens someone's research funding in some way if it's right. As Pielke Snr has stated on his blog, the correct way to refute this paper is to show where it is flawed in another "peer reviewed" paper on the same topic and in the same journal. The claim by the Beeb's "expert" that it was published in an "off topic" journal is rubbish, th journal deals with the subject matter of the paper - measurement. As you rightly state, the fact that the authors are Christian (Horror of horrors to the Atheist BBC) and they have not published it in the blatantly pro-AGW rag that Nature has become.

The appropriate term is "doubleplus guilty"...

Post a comment