“Want your, er, highly innovative research to get lots of attention, the sort that keeps those grants coming? You could do worse than start with some kind words from a peer-reviewer whose work is glowingly cited in your own paper. After that, apply for the next batch of grants.”
Peer Review corrupted out of desperation into Pal Review.
Speaks accurately to their credibility, honesty and academic integrity.
Not surprising. I read an article not too long ago about a “climate scientist” who had his wife review his paper. Not too much bias there. It wont be long before these frauds start writing peer reviews for their own papers using a nom de plume.
I marvel at the religious fervor these warmists display when their faith is challenged – I suspect this latest wave of lawfare and warmist threats against dissenters is their form of inquisition – pathetic really.
I have read no climate science papers. Its not my field, and simply looking out the window tells me all I need to know about the validity of it. Plus those dozens of pictures of NOAA thermometers next to the air conditioning outlets Kate posted for weeks and weeks, that didn’t hurt my skepticism either.
However I have read a very large number of gun control articles. There are hundreds. Most of them are so laughably bad they’d be rejected from a high school science class. That’s not merely -my- opinion, that’s mirrored by the meta-analysis done by the National Academy of Science. They were more polite than me.
How does such plainly political claptrap get grant money for thirty years? Same way the Warmies do it. Peer review by friends, grants from large political foundations who find the author’s hobby horse to be advantageous.
The circle of leech life…
“The journal’s management and editors were clearly intimidated by climate deniers who threatened to sue. So Frontiers bowed to their demands, retracted the paper, damaged its own reputation, and ultimately gave a free kick to aggressive climate deniers.
I would have expected a scientific journal to have more backbone, certainly when it comes to the crucially important issue of academic freedom.”[14]
Unlike those alarmists who threatened to sue, er, I mean have sued. Advocated to imprison anyone who speaks against the alarmists. Provided funding(like Tides)for those who wish to harm skeptics(realists) through protests and “demon”strations. And last but not least, caused millions to suffer by starvation and energy poverty for personal gain.
I am kind of an “eye for an eye” guy, so I am all for making a few alarmists pay with their lives; at the very least give up all their wealth and spend the rest of days in jail.
It is time to show alarmists what hell really is.
http://www.breitbart.com/Breitbart-London/2014/03/08/Earth-is-safe-from-global-warming-say-the-men-who-put-man-on-the-moon
http://therightclimatestuff.com/BoundingClimateSensitivityForRegDecisions.pdf
Should you get more scientifically curious you can delight yourself for an hour or two reading the above links…
Cheers
Hans Rupprecht, Commander in Chief
1st Saint Nicolaas Army
Army Group “True North”
I would suggest pier review, if the pier is still there, probably means the alarmist paper is b.s.
“Peer Review corrupted out of desperation into Pal Review.”
Sorry. That has been going on since the very first AGW “science”paper and scam.No real(read integrity and respect for the scientific method)would want their name within a billion miles of the green,UN Agenda 21 commie resurrection.
People have circumvented (near) certainty for codswallop and then have the audacity to accuse others of foolhardiness.
(SEE: inmates, asylum)
So mean…How dare Quadrant actually quote the poor woman. If you read her publications list you might think she had a subjective position as to CAGW and was pretty convinced, going in, that people who question its truth are, well, insane. (Not to mention poopy heads.)
Naturally, she is the perfect reviewer for a paper which, in so many words, suggests that people who question CAGW are poopy heads and, hey, pretty much nuts.
The best part of this story is that Lew and his Crew are perfectly exhibiting the crazed behaviours which they are diagnosing as pathological in sceptics. (Save, of course, that the sceptics have never actually exhibited said behaviours: they merely pointed out that Lew’s Emperor was statistically naked. Bad sceptics, Lèse-majesté and all that.)
With a little luck this excursion into the Twilight Zone will put an end to Lew and the SkS band of nutter zealots.
I said at the beginning of this caldron’s concoction of climate gruel.
That in the end these fakesters will bring real science into disrepute.
Climatology is a pseudo-science. To many variables with ignorance of sub systems to make it coherent.
The only reason its still a going concern, is the tax revenue from this scam. Just to much for politicians to leave behind for this grab.