Climate sceptics Monckton and Plimer have no scientific credibility
they should present this data, analysis and research in exactly the same way as other scientists do. They should publish it in peer-reviewed journals. They should subject their allegations to the rigorous scientific system
Hot air, cold air ABC The Drum Unleashed, by Alex Cook 29 Jan 2010 This week we have seen the travelling roadshow of Lord Christopher Monckton and Professor Ian Plimer spruiking their views on the climate change debate……We should have no issue with Ian Plimer and Christopher Monckton having something to say.
What is at issue is how they put their case. Science has a structure to resolve such issues.
Science works on the distinct and universal policy of peer review. Any idea, no matter how unusual, can be submitted for publication to a reputable journal. Manuscripts thus submitted are sent to reviewers (usually two or three) for critical analysis and vetting. Often times reviewers will vehemently disagree with a scientific idea, but allow publication on the basis of solid argument and good science. Poor papers which add little to scientific endeavour or are seriously flawed are rejected. For some journals, the rejection rate is extraordinary, with key journals such as Science and Nature taking only the cream of high impact scientific work. However there are many journals with an equally rigorous review system which do accept the more mundane reviews of statistical data or “lesser” scientific findings of incremental, local or national importance………..
Christopher Monckton and Ian Plimer may have valid claims against the tide of data published in support of anthropogenic climate change. If this is true they should present this data, analysis and research in exactly the same way as other scientists do. They should publish it in peer-reviewed journals. They should subject their allegations to the rigorous scientific system and let the good science float to the top.
Until this happens their criticisms ring a little hollow and are not within the broad church that is international science. It is not enough to stand from the side as Lord Monckton does and criticise. Publish or perish Christopher!.. http://www.abc.net.au/unleashed/stories/s2803278.htm
No comments yet.
1 This month
of the week – Australians for War Powers Reform (AWPR)
To see nuclear-related stories in greater depth and intensity
Antinuclear 
Leave a comment