Update 10.10.2015 – Shaking the foundation of medical research: Half of failed peer reviewed papers “spun” as success (from JoNova)
The world of peer reviewed climate research: like a universe of dark matter
It’s not like climate science suffers from unpublished “negative results” — no, it’s more like it’s built on them: like all the model runs that ran off the ranch and disappeared, and the hot spot that never went missing, but keeps being “found”. The infamous Pause in the Climate barely existed until aforest of explanations for it appeared. Then there are the strange missing proxies — like the tree rings from the last 30 years. Did no one look, have all the trees gone, or were those awkward results dropped down the memory hole? Or is it because when someone did, the proxy turns out to be useless like the Sheep Mountain hockey-stick tree rings did? Read the whole story ..
We already known for a number of years that peer-review reporting when it comes to climate science is broken.
Evidence of that was found for example in the Climategate emails. Nature and Science etc. has been hijacked and are currently only publishing Anthropogenic Global Warming “friendly” papers and at the same time refusing to publish papers that are critical.
From time to time you therefore come across activists who are making a big deal out of scientist publications that haven’t been published in Nature, Science etc. and any other journals than the AGW friendly journal is irrelevant, or worse, in their view. I am confident those activists has picked up that from certain, dishonest, “green” tax payer funded activist blogs. And now this. Goes to show there’s a lot of cleaning up to do to get rid of the swindlers, both in climate science and elsewhere.