Saturday, December 09, 2006

More Peer Review Goodness

In the end, the obvious response to Christopher Monckton is to ask why he doesn’t submit his arguments to a scientific journal for publication. After all, this is how science progresses, with new ideas being subject to the scrutiny of scientists via the route of publication in the scientific literature. If he is right that thousands of scientists in half a dozen different disciplines have got it all wrong, the potential rewards for him are enormous; a Nobel prize for overturning a large chunk of atmospheric physics and a Fellowship of the Royal Society are both almost guaranteed. The obvious reason why he doesn’t do this is that he secretly knows that his arguments lack credibility and wouldn’t pass the peer review required by mainstream scientific journals.

Dr Stephan Harrison, Senior Lecturer in Physical Geography at the University of Exeter and Senior Research Associate at the Oxford University Centre for the Environment, 20 Nov 2006. Link here

Note: The above link was to the website Turn up the Heat, set up by George Monboit - whose recent stoush with Monckton over the Puzzle Making noble's stab at atmospheric science was covered on this (and other) blogs. Turn Up the Heat is clearly ideological and biased in the sense that it promotes man made global warming as a threat. However unlike opposing right wing think tanks they're not fronting for big business and there is no actual money to be made by what they doing. So I don't know, as far as motivation is concerned, you know the "show me the money", that may be important to you when you assess information presented at this site.

By the way I am not an atmospheric scientist. But from my limited understanding I believe climate change is influenced by man induced activity and is not a natural cuddly cyclical Crichton-esq novel outcome.

That's my 0.02.

1 comment:

  1. Anonymous8:26 AM

    However unlike opposing right wing think tanks they're not fronting for big business and there is no actual money to be made by what they doing. So I don't know, as far as motivation is concerned, you know the "show me the money", that may be important to you when you assess information presented at this site.
    Mikey mate there is more money to be made pushing the AGW barrow than being a skeptic.
    For instance one of your heroes George Monboit will be making heaps from his doomsayer book Al Gore is doing likewise from his film there are all of those academics and researchers who are getting fat on the grants to "find solutions" to AGW. Airlines and Hotels make money from the conferences to discuss Kyoto. You can go on and on and find so many people on this gravy train that claims such as yours are very much in error.
    Thanks for the link by the way.

    ReplyDelete