DeSmog

NRSP: "Scientists" Who Hate Science Journals

authordefault
on

Here’s an exchange from ClimateAudit.org, a den of denial, but one where interesting scientific arguments break out nevertheless. In this case, Dr. Tim Ball, chair of the new climate change denial group, Not Really Science People (NRSP), breaks away from the science to talk instead about how unfair it is that real climate scientists insist upon reviewing the work of other real climate scientists before allowing that work to be published in reputable journals.
Here’s the exchange:

  1. One major way appears to be they peer review each others papers, which is why they keep stressing that those who question are not for the most part peer reviewed.

    Comment by Tim Ball — 24 September 2006 @ 12:26 pm

  2. For the most part, those who are criticizing are not bothering to put ass to chair seat and write papers. And when they do, they too often look like BC06 or Steve’s PPT presentation for the AGU: abortions. Let’s ditch the “hating the journals” when people are not even trying to get published.

    Comment by TCO — 24 September 2006 @ 7:18 pm

  3. TCO,

    I have to agree. Scientific revolutions are won on the battlefield of scientific journals. What many of the critics are doing is similar to guerilla warfare : don’t face the ennemy in the open, just stay on the fringe and strike here and there, claiming victory each time, but without really making a dent in the established regime. On the other hand, every published paper is another battle won. AGW proponents have understood that right from the start.

    Comment by Francois Ouellette — 25 September 2006 @ 8:20 am

Dr. Ball, of course, only ever published four peer-reviewed papers in his whole career, and none directly related to atmospheric climate change. As TCO suggests, Ball has been so busy running his cross-Canada public relations campaign that his a$$ has been nowhere near his chair.

Related Posts

Les responsables de campagne critiquent des programmes volontaires « fortement défectueux », tandis que l’analyse de DeSmog révèle l'absence de représentation de la société civile ou des communautés locales affectées par les dommages causés par l’industrie des farines et huiles de poisson.

Les responsables de campagne critiquent des programmes volontaires « fortement défectueux », tandis que l’analyse de DeSmog révèle l'absence de représentation de la société civile ou des communautés locales affectées par les dommages causés par l’industrie des farines et huiles de poisson.
on

Brazilian meat giant JBS invested just 0.03 percent of annual revenues into climate measures, researchers found.

Brazilian meat giant JBS invested just 0.03 percent of annual revenues into climate measures, researchers found.
on

Fossil fuel interests are deploying unprecedented strategies to hide evidence of companies’ deception and block liability lawsuits before they reach trial.

Fossil fuel interests are deploying unprecedented strategies to hide evidence of companies’ deception and block liability lawsuits before they reach trial.
on

Federal lawsuit alleges EPA’s rules on ethylene oxide and chloroprene emissions rely on weak industry estimates rather than real-world data on risks to health.

Federal lawsuit alleges EPA’s rules on ethylene oxide and chloroprene emissions rely on weak industry estimates rather than real-world data on risks to health.