Main Menu
Google Search
Google
Current GWH News
Global Warming Hoax News From Around the Web

World Climate Report

» A Classic Tale of Global Warming Alarmism

» More Evidence Against a Methane Time Bomb

» Agriculture: Tropical Cyclones are Welcome Visitors

» Sea Level Acceleration: Not so Fast

» Hansen Is Wrong

» Earth’s Carbon Sink Still Strong and Growing

» Wild Speculation on Climate and Polar Bears

» Illiteracy at NASA

» The Heat Was On—Before Urbanization and Greenhouse Gases

» What’s to Blame for the Rains on the Plains?

***
NewsBusters - Global Warming

» CNN's Blitzer: 'I Don't Remember' Biden's Law School Plagiarism

» CNN's Chetry: 'Please Tell Me It's Not Lipstick Again'

» MRC Report Asks: Why No Fairness Doctrine for PBS?

***

***

Climate Science: Roger Pielke Sr. Research Group

» Roger Pielke Sr. is now on Twitter!

» 2012 Climate Science Weblog in Review by Dallas Jean Staley – A Guest Post

» The Weblog Is Retiring

» Publication Of “Reply to “Comment On ‘Ocean Heat Content And Earth’s Radiation Imbalance. II. Relation To Climate Shifts’ ” by Nuccitelli Et Al. By Douglass and Knox 2012

» Q&A From A Group Of Retired NASA Personnel And Associates

» The Importance of Land Use/Land Practices On Climate – A Perspective From Jon Foley

» Interview With James Wynn In The English Department At Carnegie Mellon University

» University Of Alabama At Huntsville October 2012 Lower Tropospheric Temperature Analysis

» USA Election Day 2012

» New Paper “Climatic Variability Over Time Scales Spanning Nine Orders of Magnitude: Connecting Milankovitch Cycles With Hurst–Kolmogorov Dynamics” By Markonis And Koutsoyiannis

***


» Marvel et al. – Gavin Schmidt admits key error but disputes everything else

» A Return to Polar Urals: Wilson et al 2016

» Picking Cherries in the Gulf of Alaska

» Cherry-Picking by D’Arrigo

» Marvel et al.: Implications of forcing efficacies for climate sensitivity estimates – update

» Bob Carter

» Appraising Marvel et al.: Implications of forcing efficacies for climate sensitivity estimates

» Update of Model-Observation Comparisons

» COP21 Emission Projections

» Balascio et al and the Baffin Island Inconsistency

***

***

Global Warming News

» The Motion that Won the Stay

» CEI Rolling Out New “Richard Windsor” Revelations

» Satellites and Global Warming: Dr. Christy Sets the Record Straight

» UN Framework Convention on Climate Change Secretariat Announces Steps for Signing and Ratifying the Paris Climate Treaty. The Next Step Is Up To the Senate.

» Robert M. Carter, RIP

» Mandating 100% Renewable Energy: It’s About Jobs?

» Paris Agreement: Recycled “Process” Socialism

» Paris Agreement Is a Real Tiger: Lock and Load

» Climate Change Hearing: Lessons from Data vs. Dogma

» Is the Paris Climate Agreement a Treaty?

***

***


***


***


***


***


***

More Global Warming Hoax News Feeds

---
Since Exxon Hasn't Sent Us Our First Million Dollars Yet You're Welcome To Help Pay Our Bills Until They Do.









Headlines

»Rush Limbaugh: Libs Come Up with Reason Algore’s Prediction Didn’t Come True
»NOAA worries about impact of ‘climate change’ on Valentines Day – Federal science agency frets about how chocolate ‘is affected by climate’
Federal science agency addresses "helping chocolate cope with climate change" for Valentines Day. 
»EPA Was Not Always Confident Regulating CO2 Would Be A Legal Slam Dunk
»Analysis: It’s ‘game over’ for global warming activists after Supreme Court EPA ruling
'This could be the proverbial string which causes Paris to unravel,' The New York Times reported
»Arctic Sea Ice Trend May Have Turned The Corner As Ice Volume Picks Up Over Past 5 Years
»NASA Study Concludes ‘Global Warming’ Is Actually Slowing Sea Level Rise
»Oops: Obama administration repeatedly told UN EPA ‘climate regs’ were ‘legally bulletproof’
»Al Gore’s global warming doomsday passes uneventfully
»Flashback 1987: ‘Global Warming’ Causes Sea Levels to Fall — 2016: ‘Global Warming’ Causes Slowdown In Sea Level Rise
Climate Depot's Marc Morano: "Before 'global warming' caused sea level INCREASES, 'global warm ...
»Flashback: Prominent Dutch Scientist: ‘I find the Doomsday picture Al Gore is painting – a 6m sea level rise, 15 times IPCC number — entirely without merit’
Featured on page 168 of the 2010 Special Report updated from U.S. Senate Report: SPECIAL REPORT: Mo ...


Date published: Sat, 13 Feb 2016 18:07:30 +0000
Details

»UAH V6 Global Temperature Update for January, 2016: +0.54 deg C
NOTE: This is the tenth monthly update with our new Version 6.0 dataset. Differences versus the old ...
»After the Snowstorm: Color Satellite Views
The VIIRS color imager on the Suomi/NPP satellite provided nice views yesterday of the heavy blanket ...
»On that 2015 Record Warmest Claim
We now have the official NOAA-NASA report that 2015 was the warmest year by far in the surface therm ...
»75 Million to Get Snowblasted
The snowstorm expected to begin in earnest on Friday is still looking like one for the record books, ...
»Frost Flowers: The Frost Awakens
It’s been over a year since I first found “frost flowers” growing in our backyard ...
»UAH V6 Global Temperature Update for Dec. 2015: +0.44 deg. C
NOTE: This is the ninth monthly update with our new Version 6.0 dataset. Differences versus the old ...
»Sierra Expecting 10 Feet of Snow in Next 10 Days
With the Sierra Nevada snowpack above normal in this El Nino-fueled winter, we now enter what is usu ...
»What Causes El Nino Warmth?
Dick Lindzen suggested to me recently that this might be a good time to address the general question ...
»No Snow for Christmas? That’s OK…Snow is Racist Anyway
As reported yesterday, an enterprising fellow actually got college students to sign a petition to st ...
»Who Will Get a White Christmas?
El Nino is really doing a number on December winter weather this year, and as a result most of the e ...


Date published: Mon, 01 Feb 2016 19:43:34 +0000
Details

»US Average Temperature Trends in Context
Cross-posted from Coyoteblog. There was some debate a while back around about a temperature chart so ...
»Revisiting (Yet Again) Hansen’s 1998 Forecast on Global Warming to Congress
I want to briefly revisit Hansen’s 1998 Congressional forecast.  Yes, I and many others have c ...
»Matt Ridley: What the Climate Wars Did to Science
I cannot recommend Matt Ridley’s new article strongly enough.  It covers a lot of ground be he ...
»Manual Adjustments in the Temperature Record
I have been getting inquiries from folks asking me what I think about stories like this one, where P ...
»Mistaking Cyclical Variations for the Trend
I titled my very first climate video “What is Normal,” alluding to the fact that climate ...
»Typhoons and Hurricanes
(Cross-posted from Coyoteblog) The science that CO2 is a greenhouse gas and causes some warming is h ...
»Those Who Follow Climate Will Definitely Recognize This
This issue will be familiar to anyone who has spent time with temperature graphs.  We can ask oursel ...
»Layman’s Primer on the Climate Skeptic Position
I am a “lukewarmer”, which means a skeptic that agrees that man-made CO2 is incrementall ...
»When Climate Alarmism Limits Environmental Progress
One of my favorite sayings is that “years from now, environmentalists will look back on the cu ...
»Why We Are Exaggerating “Extreme Weather”
I have written in article at Forbes.com called Summer of the Shark, Global Warming Edition.  It desc ...


Date published: Thu, 04 Feb 2016 20:07:17 +0000
Details

»Why I like Obama’s Oil Tax With Just A Few Tweaks
By Elmer Beauregard Obama is proposing a $10 tax on oil to do 2 things, stop the use of fossil fuels ...
»Reprieve! Binding Paris treaty now voluntary mush
But Obama still wants to send US energy use and living standards backward CFACT.org Paris climate ta ...
»Why Bother? John Kerry Admits American CO2 Cuts Would Be Pointless
by Steve Milloy It’s 40 seconds that should turn the global warming world upside down. Secretary of ...
»UN Releases Slimmed Down Draft Outcome at COP 21
CFACT (France, Le Bourget) French Foreign Minister and COP 21 President Laurent Fabius, a Socialist, ...
»New Report: The Truth About China
Global Warming Policy Foundation China will talk a good game at the UN Climate Conference in Paris b ...


Date published: Sun, 07 Feb 2016 05:33:51 +0000
Details

»Marvel et al. – Gavin Schmidt admits key error but disputes everything else
A guest article by Nicholas Lewis Introduction Gavin Schmidt has finally provided, at the GISS websi ...
»A Return to Polar Urals: Wilson et al 2016
Wilson et al 2016, like D’Arrigo et al 2006, includes a ‘Polar Urals’ chronology a ...
»Picking Cherries in the Gulf of Alaska
The bias arising from ex post selection of sites for regional tree ring chronologies has been a long ...
»Cherry-Picking by D’Arrigo
One of the longest standing Climate Audit issues with paleoclimate reconstructions is ex post decisi ...
»Marvel et al.: Implications of forcing efficacies for climate sensitivity estimates – update
A guest article by Nicholas Lewis Introduction In a recent article I discussed the December 2015 Mar ...
»Bob Carter
I was very saddened to learn of the sudden death of Bob Carter ( here here).   He was one of the few ...
»Appraising Marvel et al.: Implications of forcing efficacies for climate sensitivity estimates
A guest article by Nicholas Lewis Note: This is a long article: a summary is available here. Introdu ...
»Update of Model-Observation Comparisons
The strong El Nino has obviously caused great excitement in the warmist community.  It should also c ...
»COP21 Emission Projections
In the wake of COP21, I thought that it would be interesting to compare the respective pathways of C ...
»Balascio et al and the Baffin Island Inconsistency
There was some publicity this week on a paper by Young et al (Science Advances, 2015), which, accord ...


Date published: Sat, 13 Feb 2016 18:06:19 +0000
Details




Date published: not known
Details

»Wind power is useless across Australia today
Scanning news headlines I discovered that the fault in the BASSLINK cable has not been found yet so ...
»So who gave the CFMEU $847,000
This is a weird story uncovered by ABC researchers but now that we know the Tasmanian businesswoman ...
»Perth 4 days over 40°C heatwave nothing out of the ordinary for Perth heatwaves
We have all seen the media beat ups about the “Great Four day Perth heatwave 7th to 10th Feb 2016” – never a mention that that the ever expanding Perth urban heat island UHI might contribute to this event. Credit where credit is due though, the original BoM forecast was pretty good. Unlike their Brisbane […]
»High-altitude water vapour, critical for Greenhouse, is not well measured
New paper – The Forgotten Water Vapor at High Altitudes – Scientists find that estimatio ...
»New climate book ‘Mirrors and Mazes: a guide to the climate debate’ by Dr Howard Brady
Read the review by Emeritus Professor Peter G Flood PhD (Qld), MAusIMM, IEM (Harvard) – let me ...
»Two years ago I reported UAH satellites were reading too warm at times over Australia
From Dec 2013 – Warming departure in UAH lower troposphere satellite temperatures compared to ...
»Paper gold goes nuts in New York afternoon – could global warming be affecting the gold price?
While the slapdown in price just after 8am NY time is stock standard normal I can not recall a jump ...
»Another exaggerated BoM Brisbane heat forecast – turns out a one day wonder
What is it with the BoM – so Brisbane has a humid and hot day last Tuesday – for heavens ...
»Perth region breaks cold night records two mornings in a row
On 1st & 2nd Feb 2016 the Perth region has had record breaking cold mornings. See comments by U ...
»Another failed Bureau of Meteorology daytime temperature Outlook
Poor old BoM seldom takes a trick – make your own temperature maps – make your own Outlo ...


Date published: Fri, 12 Feb 2016 05:42:17 +0000
Details
Latest Forum Posts
Posted by Jesson Liu
[ REQUIRES ADMIN APPROVAL ]
01/26 06:03

Posted by Jesson Liu
HI, can you help me? I deleted some text messages [more ...]
01/24 05:34

Posted by PhilipSmith
Is that a jade? You can confirm that by a jade exp[more ...]
01/13 01:22

Posted by Hank Liu
Have you lost your data? Unable to retrieve it or [more ...]
01/09 01:07

Posted by anonymous
Studying this info! From the beginning to the end,[more ...]
01/07 15:23

Posted by PhilipSmith
Huge discount on Tank007 PT40 Flashlight torchTank007 PT40 is the most powerful flashlightHow big should the flashlight I select be?. With the high power LED, it is best for hunting, riding, etc.; If you love hunting, this flashlight is the best choice.Key featuresBrand & Model: USA Cree XM-L U2LED Lifespan: above 100,000 hoursMax Brightness: 1000 lumensThrow Beam: 300mNow it is only 59.99USD, orgiignally 99.99USD.If you are looking for a high power LED flashlight at low price, Tank007 PT12 should be a good choice. Bright, waterproof, and high power. With a 18650 battery, you are able to use it for about 1.5 hours at high light mode, which allows you to work in emergency.Christmas is coming. DO you need some gift for your parents or children? Do you need a mini flashlight as gift? Here is a good choice for you. Tank007 ES12 stainless steel flashlight is a perfect gift. It is cute, exquisite, and durable. Among mini flashlights, this one is the best. And the good news is, now, it is on sale, 50% off, so what are you waiting for? Why not get one now?UV LEd flashlightNow, rechargeable flashlight is popular. Considering our environment, used-batteries can make our earth worse. Rechargeable batteries solve this problem. To those who need flashlights, battery cost is large if they just use one-time battery. Here, Tank007 TR01 is a good rechargeable flashlight that can directly charge the battey inside, which saves much trouble.best EDC flashlightbest pocket flashlight
12/31 02:00

Posted by PhilipSmith
Cudgel, tool compartment and EDC flashlight are im[more ...]
12/24 00:21

Posted by Anonymous
If you delete photos on your iPhone, you need an i[more ...]
12/09 18:40

Posted by Anonymous
If you lose data on your Samsung phone, you can tr[more ...]
12/08 18:49

Posted by Anonymous
[ REQUIRES ADMIN APPROVAL ]
12/07 06:52

Relevant Sponsors

Donations
Any Amount helps support improvements





* or *


Advertise on this site

Road Gear

License Plate Frames
Support the Truth

Skeptic License Plate Frame
"SKEPTIC"

It's Natural License Plate Frame
"It`s Natural"

Liberty License Plate Frame
"Liberty"

* MORE *
Strong and durable metal license plate holder. Uses full color high resolution images. UV and Water Protection. Satisfaction Guaranteed
RSS Feeds
Our news can be syndicated by using these rss feeds.
rss1.0
rss2.0
rdf
Welcome
Username:

Password:


Remember me

[ ]
[ ]
Mobile Version
e107mobileYou can now visit us on your mobile phone! Simply goto http://GlobalWarmingHoax.com on your mobile phone or PDA to get started!

Some Limitations of the Peer Review Process and Its Effect on the AGW Issue - by Leonard Weinstein, ScD
Admin, Sunday 07 June 2009 - 21:51:28 // comment: 43 //     printer friendly   //     Font Size - Increase / Decrease / Reset

Most everyone knows the classic definition of peer review, "the process of subjecting an author's scholarly work, research or ideas to the scrutiny of others who are experts in the same field". But do you know how the process actually works? Dr. Weinstein does; he has been on both ends of the process. No Longer Supported
Often times, the ones performing the peer review are friends or close colleagues of the original author. Furthermore, if anyone were to come out of the woodwork and debunk anthropogenic global warming, it would dry up that seemingly infinite sea of funding they were receiving. In fact, the "Piltdown Man" hoax, where the skull of a "missing link" was created by combining the jawbone of an orangutan with a human skull by fame-craving scientists, went on for over 40 years because of lack of true, proper scientific scrutiny. They were so anxious to prove evolution that they were blinded in their observations. Dr. Weinstein reveals in this article how many scientists today may also be blinded in the peer review process by the temptations of funding, prestige, and possibly even the sheer peer pressure that occurs within the scientific community.





Some Limitations of the Peer Review Process and Its Effect on the AGW Issue
Leonard Weinstein, ScD
May 29, 2009




Monographs, books, technical papers, white papers, and other forms of published material that are to be widely disseminated should ideally be examined by independent reviewers (generally called peer reviewers) with reasonable knowledge of the subject area. The reviewer may or may not be as expert in the details of the subject as the author, but should be at least generally expert in a broader overlapping field. Frequently papers have material that covers more than one subject area and people within a narrow field may do poorly reviewing the broader subject. It is frequently best to have some reviewers that are knowledgeable people but not as close to the narrow field as the author, for a more independent and broader coverage.

The reviews, possibly resulting in suggested changes, do not assure the final material is correct. The lack of a review also does not mean the results are not correct and clear. It just increases the chance for errors to slip through.

If the paper is very complex or has numerous references, it may not be possible to do as good a review as desired in a reasonable time unless the reviewer is intimately familiar with the work. These reviews are often done within a small group of experts, who may even have collaborated on each others papers. The members of the overly narrow review group may have evolved toward a common understanding on the subject, and if the understanding is not correct, almost all of the limited number of experts in that field may make common mistakes that outside reviewers may not make. However, a reviewer outside that group may not be expert enough to be fully on top of the material. This is a problem without a clear solution, especially in fields with a limited number of experts. There are also occasions when errors in assumptions used in developing equations, or in interpretation of instrumentation result in erroneous conclusions that are repeated in many papers until the error is caught and corrected. For this reason all papers must be considered suspect until history vindicates or falsifies them. A paradigm shift on a subject may result from these types of errors being corrected at later times.

An example of the problems that may arise with peer-reviewed papers occurred on a project that I worked on for several years. The branch I was working with was examining possible methods to reduce turbulent skin friction over surfaces, with the goal of reducing aircraft and ship drag, and thus save fuel. We had developed several successful concepts that gave small but useful reductions in drag. These included “longitudinal microgrooves”, “large eddy breakup devices”, and for water flow, “air bubbles in longitudinal grooves”. An additional concept we worked on was a “compliant wall”. This last method appeared to be particularly promising as a method to damp out near wall turbulence by absorbing wall pressure fluctuations. Unlike the other methods, this last technique required a soft and movable wall, so it was more difficult to measure the drag of a test object. Several other groups all over the world also started work on this concept (bandwagon effect), and our group (and many of the other groups) obtained what we thought were favorable results in several tests. Dozens of peer-reviewed papers were published in main line journals (e.g., Journal of Fluid Physics, AIAA journal, etc.). The main experimental technique used to measure the drag for this type of model was a hot-wire Reynolds stress probe. Test results seemed to indicate a large reduction in drag. In order to independently verify the favorable result obtained with this technique, I designed and had built a large sensitive drag balance to directly measure the drag on a panel model. The direct measurement did not show the reduction in drag indicated by the hot wire probe. After much analysis, I found the cause of the problem. Reynolds stress drag measurements are proxy drag measurements. They are related to the drag under some special assumptions. In this case the critical assumption was that all of the vertical motion energy in the boundary layer was due to turbulent flow, and stayed in the boundary layer. It turned out that with a compliant wall, the flexible wall motion induced a vertical motion pressure wave that propagated as sound out of the boundary layer, so the required assumption was not valid.

Many of the other favorable tests had used the same type of probe with the same false positive result. Those that did not use the hot wire often gave results that were confusing, but many still passed peer review. It appears that since some of the other papers seemed to be getting the correct answers, they assumed they had it also and selectively chose the more favorable parts of their results for publication. The idea was they knew what the answer had to be so they just had to be selective in choosing data so they would be with the successful group.

When my paper was published showing the cause of the errors in the results, almost all of the compliant wall drag reduction efforts ended.

It appears to me that the AGW supporters are on a similar bandwagon. Initially the observation that the temperature had significantly increased (1 degree F) over the last 150 years, and the atmospheric CO2 content had increased significantly (over 30%) in the same period suggested a relationship. Previous analysis had indicated that CO2 is a greenhouse gas, and could cause some temperature increase. The effort to show that the temperature rise rate and level was unusual was pushed by several scientists, and initially it looked as if this might be true. After many other scientists jumped on the bandwagon, because they assumed the hypothesis was valid, they then had a personal stake (funding, prestige) to support the claims. Later data and analysis seemed to show the temperature increase was a local period of global warming (GW), but did not have a dominant component of AGW. This threatened the whole structure of the AGW position, and as is typical when a paradigm shift threatens to occur, was met with considerable resistance. This was further exasperated by the political and social involvement that had started a major drive to cut man made greenhouse gas production, and at a very high cost to society.

Recent efforts by even well respected authors to publish papers that falsify claims of AGW have had great difficulty passing peer review, apparently because they went against the current paradigm, not because they were shown to be in error. The misuse of claims of support for AGW by “peer reviewed publications”, and rejection of analysis because it is not peer reviewed is often used to try to discredit the opposition. This is not how science is done. The facts should speak for themselves.

New technology is changing some of the older paradigms of communication, and use of electronic media now allows very rapid and sometimes real time interaction discussing material and presenting results. Paul Coppin stated in a response to a recent blog “Technical blogs are rapidly replacing the “letters” sections of formal journals as the place where a public airing of a journal article or topic takes place. The very nature of blogs also provides a means for the lay populace to look inside both the science and the process of the science. In the past this has been generally closed to common scrutiny. In particular, science writers have access to information and opinion they had to previous dig out or interview for”. This crossover of discussion will surely increase. Since the purpose of science is (supposed) to advance knowledge, the real time open interaction may actually do a better job than the normal peer review process for much (but not all) material. Formal publications still should be made when possible for unique data or concepts, but discussions of the consequences are probably better done in the electronic medium. One major purpose of the formal publication is getting the author credit for the material. There is not presently an equivalent way to archive and give credit for a publication on the web. There needs to be such a structure made available. The draft of a publication may be put on a web site and left open for review and comments. This might actually be a more effective peer review process for some types of papers since a wider audience has access to look for flaws. This may be done in conjunction with some formal peer reviewing. The corrected final paper then may be archived, but with continuous access to later catch overlooked problems.

Click here for a brief Bio of Leonard Weinstein, ScD




Reprinted here with the permission of Leonard Weinstein, ScD


Share or Bookmark this Article Using:
| furl furl | reddit reddit | del.icio.us del.icio.us | magnoliacom magnoliacom | digg digg | newsvine newsvine | Stumble_it Stumble_it | Facebook Facebook | Google Google | Fark Fark | Sphere Sphere | Netscape Netscape | Technorati Technorati | Yahoo! Yahoo! | Add to Favorites and Additional Bookmarks: Share GlobalWarmingHoax.com - Where the Truth Heats Up





Latest Forum Posts


Threads: 2124 | Replies: 941 | Views: 6591401
Translate to: French German Italian Spanish Portuguese GTM_LAN_DUTCH Russian Chinese Arabic Korean English