“In supporting documents, the authors admit that the data used was of very low quality. This study is really an exercise in selective data and manipulated methodologies used to reach conclusions that deliberately contradict mainstream science,” Jones said.
Howarth, however, defended his work as meeting strict academic and scientific standards. “It’s being published in a highly respected journal and has been rigorously peer-reviewed,” a report from Reuters quoted Howarth as saying. “This is not advocacy. This is science.”
Disrupting the Borg is expensive and time consuming!
Google Search
-
Recent Posts
- Michael Mann Predicts The Demise Of X
- COP29 Preview
- UK Labour To Save The Planet
- A Giant Eyesore
- CO2 To Destroy The World In Ten Years
- Rats Jumping Off The Climate Ship
- UK Labour To Save The Planet
- “False Claims” And Outright Lies”
- Michael Mann Cancelled By CNN
- Spoiled Children
- Great Lakes Storm Of November 11, 1835
- Harris To Win Iowa
- Angry Democrats
- November 9, 1913 Storm
- Science Magazine Explains Trump Supporters
- Obliterating Bill Gates
- Scientific American Editor In Chief Speaks Out
- The End Of Everything
- Harris To Win In A Blowout
- Election Results
- “Glaciers, Icebergs Melt As World Gets Warmer”
- “falsely labeling”
- Vote For Change By Electing The Incumbent
- Protesting Too Much Snow
- Glaciers Vs. The Hockey Stick
Recent Comments
- Gamecock on CO2 To Destroy The World In Ten Years
- dearieme on COP29 Preview
- Greg in NZ on COP29 Preview
- conrad ziefle on A Giant Eyesore
- GeologyJim on A Giant Eyesore
- arn on UK Labour To Save The Planet
- Tel on UK Labour To Save The Planet
- dm on CO2 To Destroy The World In Ten Years
- D. Boss on Michael Mann Cancelled By CNN
- Robertvd on UK Labour To Save The Planet
Nothing to see here, the Lead author of the CARB Diesel Study got his degree out of a Cracker Jacks box and it’s great research.
http://articles.ocregister.com/2009-12-03/opinion/24655247_1_carb-diesel-soot The scientist with a real degree that dimed him out gets fired from UCLA http://www.foxnews.com/us/2010/08/31/pc-professors-firing-fueling-exhaustive-debate/.
It’s par for the Climate Warming course.
This was a break in the usual peer reviewed love fest among climate scientists. Some one must have injected truth serum!
I thought at first Phil Jones was giving us an honest opinion of his own work.
What is the point of this post? There is nothing about peer-review in the actual article.
Err, what’s this then?…… “Howarth, however, defended his work as meeting strict academic and scientific standards. “It’s being published in a highly respected journal and has been rigorously peer-reviewed,” a report from Reuters quoted Howarth as saying.”
I think Howarth’s comment might give you a slight clue.
Howarth, however, defended his work as meeting strict academic and scientific standards. “It’s being published in a highly respected journal and has been rigorously peer-reviewed,”
lol, I need to remember to refresh before posting…..
lol, Steve, the story is even more in showing that peer-review is entirely crap!!!!
Ingraffea:(One of the authors of the study) “We do not intend for you to accept what we have reported on today as the definitive scientific study in respect to this question, clearly it is not……”
Ingraffea: “I hope you don’t gather from this presentation that we think we’re right.”
Howarth:(the other author) “A lot of the data we used are really low quality, but…”
There’s a lot more golly gee-whiz stuff to dissect, but if this doesn’t show everybody what the peer-review process is, nothing will.
lmao!!!! And it got published.
http://www.energyindepth.org/2011/04/five-things-to-know-about-the-cornell-shale-study/
Here’s the video of their quotes.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EHg6Ueb2t-E&feature=player_embedded
hahaahahahahaha!!!!