The scandal of fiddled global warming data

[BlasterBates]

I assumed he'd read at least the abstracts of all 1350+ seeing as he pointed us in the direction of the blog and the blog is not itself a peer reviewed literature review of systematic review.

If that's not the case:

BB, as you linked us to the blog, in your (accepting not professional or peer reviewed) opinion, approximately how many of the 1350+ peer reviewed papers support:

His blog is not peer reviewed but is not necessarily wrong. But since it isn't peer reviewed it is unconvincing.

I think that is the text we agreed on.

[speling bee]

His blog is not peer reviewed but is not necessarily wrong. But since it isn't peer reviewed it is unconvincing.

I think that is the text we agreed on.

Thank you for posting something not necessarily wrong but unconvincing.

[pjclarke]

I assumed he'd read at least the abstracts of all 1350+ seeing as he pointed us in the direction of the blog and the blog is not itself a peer reviewed literature review of systematic review.

If that's not the case:

BB, as you linked us to the blog, in your (accepting not professional or peer reviewed) opinion, approximately how many of the 1350+ peer reviewed papers support:

Whoa, first - how many are actually peer-reviewed journal articles? We are, after all, sceptics. How many, for example appeared in Energy and Environment?

[speling bee]

Whoa, first - how many are actually peer-reviewed journal articles? We are, after all, sceptics. How many, for example appeared in Energy and Environment?

Can we at least let BB have a chance first to defend Energy and Environment as a learned peer reviewed journal (and perhaps to share its impact factor??)

[pjclarke]

Nexus 6: The worst climate science paper ever of all time anywhere

(and yes, it is on the list)

[speling bee]

Nexus 6: The worst climate science paper ever of all time anywhere

Sorry, PJ. That looks like another blog, or is it peer reviewed?

[BrilloPad]

Spelling Bee would argue if you said the sun would come up in the morning.

[Sysman]

But since it isn't peer reviewed it is unconvincing.

I've just been ploughing through an academic paper which I assume was peer reviewed.

The author made the simple mistake of confusing decimal and hexadecimal so the bit of code he included is a load of tosh.

It would appear that nobody picked that up.

Based on this example of one* I conclude that peer reviewing isn't all it's cracked up to be.

* this is General

[speling bee]

Spelling Bee would argue if you said the sun would come up in the morning.

No I wouldn't.

[pjclarke]

Sorry, PJ. That looks like another blog, or is it peer reviewed?

Ah, no sadly. It's a non-peer-reviewed critique of a joke paper in a joke journal listed in a joke list. E & E is not the worst journal cited though, amazingly. PopTech likes two articles published in the 'Journal of Scientific Exploration'.

Here's a list of research published in JSE. My favourite has to be ...

An Empirical Study of Some Astrological Factors in Relation to Dog Behaviour Differences by Statistical Analysis and Compared with Human Characteristics.

Personally, I would think twice before citing a Dog Astrology journal. But hey, gotta get those numbers up somehow...