Buy

Books
Click images for more details

Support

 

Twitter
Recent comments
Recent posts
Currently discussing
Links

A few sites I've stumbled across recently....

Powered by Squarespace
« Hobbits and hockey sticks | Main | Media blitz »
Thursday
Jul222010

More media

 

GWPF have responded to the Times' silly "sceptics funded by big oil" story, pointing out that their articles of association preclude them from accepting oil money. Despite this the Times have tried to link them to big oil and have refused them a right of reply.

Richard Black discusses global warming scepticism alongside consideration of neo-nazi attacks on Stephen Schneider. Nice.

Adam Corner, writing in the THES, says that the CRU scientists were exonerated (H/T Doug Keenan) and argues that peer review is still effective. Doug Keenan has written to him putting him right. There is an accompanying editorial which repeats the central theme but at least seems to think there are lessons to be learned.

Dear Dr. Corner,

Your article asserts that researchers at the Climatic Research Unit have been exonerated of wrongdoing. I dispute that.

I have alleged that Phil Jones committed fraud in his work on the 2007 IPCC Report. My allegation was published in a peer-reviewed paper. It was also widely publicized, including in a front-page story in The Guardian. Yet neither the Russell Review nor the Oxburgh Review considered any of the evidence for the allegation.

Other people have also had their allegations against researchers at CRU not properly investigated. David Holland’s allegation, for example—where the Russell Review just asked CRU researchers and their supporters if the researchers were guilty, and then accepted the replies without question, or asking Holland for comment.

The Reviews were plainly not attempting to reach justice. That, however, is not the problem. The real problem is that the lack of systemic accountability. The reviews were ad hoc responses and should never have existed. There should be some general mechanism in place whereby allegations of improper behavior are dealt with.

There are tens of thousands of scientists in the United Kingdom. As far as I know, none have been convicted of research fraud in at least twenty years. That is not credible. What kind of society would we have if there were no police, judiciary, or prisons? That, in effect, is the system in place in science today.

The result is a culture of impunity. The main problems with the peer review system are consequences of that culture. There are many other consequences: bogus research is widespread.

Sincerely,

Douglas J. Keenan

PrintView Printer Friendly Version

Reader Comments (12)

There was a time when the Thunderer was respected. Now it is just another rag happy to tell lies. I wonder how long before it goes bankrupt.?

Jul 22, 2010 at 1:17 PM | Unregistered CommenterPhillip Bratby

Richard chooses to write Schneiders death, with a THREE month old story about stormfront, with less than subtle obvious implications that sceptics are like this

thishttp://www.splcenter.org/blog/2010/04/06/questions-on-climate-change-stormfront-has-an-answer/

Yet sceptics that knew Schneider write positively about him this week, Climate audit, Watts up, etc. and a positive climategate meeting, where the mainstream sceptics and pro AGW people mingled and had drinks, is not worth a mention.. ie extremists be ignored, there is a possible middle ground COULD have been the story...

His article was by choice..

Jul 22, 2010 at 1:45 PM | Unregistered CommenterBarry Woods

I have alleged that Phil Jones committed fraud in his work on the 2007 IPCC Report. My allegation was published in a peer-reviewed paper. It was also widely publicized, including in a front-page story in The Guardian.

Certainly Keenan's allegations, if untrue, would be actionable under UK law. Has Phil Jones responded? If not, why not?

Jul 22, 2010 at 3:11 PM | Unregistered CommenterJack Maloney

I do not see Doug Keenan's in THES article comments, but Dave Holland has posted an important one.

Jul 22, 2010 at 3:34 PM | Unregistered CommenterPharos

Richard Black writes (in relation to Stormfront invective against Stephen Schnieder):

"Here is perhaps an issue that ought to concern people sceptical of human-induced climate change."

I hope he is not implying scepticism of human-induced climate change is a view which, if held, makes the holder responsible in some way for Stormfront's actions?

Jul 22, 2010 at 3:37 PM | Unregistered CommenterCameron Rose

Pharos,

My comment was sent by e-mail to Corner, Cc'ing Phil Baty (author of the editorial). I also sent a copy to David Holland. My preference is for THE to publish another article, which is realistic.

Jul 22, 2010 at 3:47 PM | Unregistered CommenterDouglas J. Keenan

Richard Black is despicable. I've never heard of Stormfront and I doubt if anyone else who comes on here had heard of them either.

I also didn't know (nor care) that Schneider was Jewish. I do know that, in my experience, the Greenies are far more likely to be anti-Israeli and even pro Hezbollah than skeptics.

And have we all forgotten Polly Higgins and her "Ecocide" campaign
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2010/apr/09/ecocide-crime-genocide-un-environmental-damage

"Supporters of a new ecocide law also believe it could be used to prosecute "climate deniers" who distort science and facts to discourage voters and politicians from taking action to tackle global warming and climate change."

No doubt Richard Black thinks this is a brilliant wheeze.

Jul 22, 2010 at 4:02 PM | Unregistered CommenterMartin Brumby

Tell him, the moderators will let you.. be polite about it.

Jul 22, 2010 at 4:13 PM | Unregistered CommenterBarry Woods

There is a clear allegation of fraud here which Phil Jones has never contested despite having been confronted with it by Keenan on multiple occasions. Why has he never contested it ? Because he know's it's true.

Perhaps it's time Lord Acton at the UEA did something about it. I am not holding my breath. Oh no I almost forgot, Phil Jones has been reappointed. Oh well.

Jul 22, 2010 at 7:31 PM | Unregistered CommenterFred

A.W. Montford's, "The Hockey Stick Illusion" was the most fun to read I've had in years. Hope someone will make it into a movie. Having said that, I believe in university life power goes to those who bring in the most research funds. These professors become virtually untouchable. Thus if a problem arises such as with Michael Mann's or Phil Jones' work, people at their respective university administrations, the journals they have published in, and their sponsors are all likely to gather in a circle, horns out as say a herd of musk oxen when faced with opposition. I think a book as large as The Hockey Stick Illusion could be written by following the money trail and probably would be as interesting.

Jul 23, 2010 at 5:25 AM | Unregistered CommenterWilliam H. Pound, PhD

Buried in the ESSEX section of the BBC website, 5 days after page three in the Sunday Times... BBC, AGW media gatekeeping again?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-essex-10712286

Climate study funding at Norfolk university suspended
Scientists at the University of East Anglia (UEA) have had funding of $200,000 (£131,000) suspended by the US government in a row over e-mails.

The US Department of Energy (DoE) said it had not decided whether to reinstate the long-standing funding after the so-called ClimateGate affair.

Climate sceptics alleged leaked e-mails undermined the integrity of UEA's Climatic Research Unit (CRU).

The UEA confirmed the DoE has held off funding despite the unit being cleared."

Jul 23, 2010 at 10:32 AM | Unregistered CommenterBarry Woods

Earlier this year (I think) I posted on a comment thread at THES, it was in a Philosophy section but must have been discussing Climate Science that week. I mentioned my own story of U-turn and how I taught myself the science and then wrote it up to try to help non-scientists grasp enough of the science itself.

I got so many thank-yous it was quite overwhelming. So some stuff can get through, sometimes. But Richard Black! And Ben Webster! hey, I was brought up to speak the truth, and to believe that truth mattered. And I still know it matters. Even Tom Peters, who seems to be one of USA's top business coaches, talks about the importance of being able to say "sorry!" - even in straight economic terms.

Jul 23, 2010 at 11:09 PM | Unregistered CommenterLucy Skywalker

PostPost a New Comment

Enter your information below to add a new comment.

My response is on my own website »
Author Email (optional):
Author URL (optional):
Post:
 
Some HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>