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

***


» Centenary of the End of the Battle of the Somme

» The Destruction of Huma Abedin’s Emails on the Clinton Server and their Surprise Recovery

» Was early onset industrial-era warming anthropogenic, as Abram et al. claim?

» Re-examining Cook’s Mt Read (Tasmania) Chronology

» Esper et al 2016 and the Oroko Swamp

» Gergis and Law Dome

» Joelle Gergis, Data Torturer

» Gergis

» Are energy budget TCR estimates biased low, as Richardson et al (2016) claim?

» Deflategate: Controversy is due to Scientist Error

***

***

Global Warming News

» SJW-day at COP22

» Clean Power Plan: EPA’s Updated Base Case Now Tallies with EIA Data

» Clean Power Plan Oral Argument Transcript Available Here!

» President Obama and Chinese President Xi will officially join the Paris Climate Treaty on 3rd September

» South China Morning Post reports: China and US to ratify landmark Paris climate deal ahead of G20 summit, sources reveal

» Posting: Little-Known Documents Pertinent to Assessing the Legality of EPA’s Clean Energy Incentive Program

» Kyoto-Financed Cook Stoves Fail as Health/Climate “Intervention”

» CEQ Finalizes NEPA Guidance for Greenhouse Gases: Will Pointless Keystone XL Controversy Become ‘New Normal’?

» Democratic Platform Vows To Meet Climate Challenge with Good-Paying Jobs, Cheaper Energy from Green Sources, and National Mobilization

» Cognitive Dissonance Among Elected Climate Alarmists

***

***


***


***


***


***


***

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

»Trump could face the ‘biggest trial of the century’ — over climate change
»Al Gore: ‘I Felt Good’ About Trump Meeting, Ivanka Is ‘Very Committed’ on Climate Policy
»EPA Chief warns utilities: ‘Next Administration will never allow’ continuation of Trump policies
»Al Gore just had ‘an extremely interesting conversation’ with Trump on climate change
»The One Photo From Ivanka Trump’s Meeting With Al Gore
»Al Gore: climate change threat leaves ‘no time to despair’ over Trump victory
»Donald Trump, Ivanka Trump Meet With Al Gore
»DESPITE DENIAL, GLOBAL TEMPERATURES ARE DROPPING FAST
»Trump Could Appoint Someone Totally Unexpected To Head EPA – A PhD chemical engineer
»Trump’s Election Means A Chance For ‘A Return To Reason In Climate Policy’, German Expert Writes


Date published: Tue, 06 Dec 2016 09:26:20 +0000
Details

»UAH Global Temperature Update for November 2016: +0.45 deg. C
November Temperature Up a Little from October; 2016 Almost Certain to be Warmest in 38 Year Satellit ...
»Global Warming: Policy Hoax versus Dodgy Science
In the early 1990s I was visiting the White House Science Advisor, Sir Prof. Dr. Robert Watson, who ...
»Super-zoom videos of supermoon rising
The last couple nights I tried out my new Nikon Coolpix P900 super-zoom camera on the rising moon, a ...
»UAH Global Temperature Update for October 2016: +0.41 deg. C
October Temperature Down a Little from September NOTE: This is the nineteenth monthly update with ou ...
»What Do 16 Years of CERES Data Tell Us About Global Climate Sensitivity?
Short Answer: It all depends upon how you interpret the data. It has been quite a while since I have ...
»New Santer et al. Paper on Satellites vs. Models: Even Cherry Picking Ends with Model Failure
(the following is mostly based upon information provided by Dr. John Christy) Dr. John Christy ...
»Global Warming be Damned: Record Corn, Soybeans, Wheat
For many years we have been warned that climate change is creating a “climate crisis”, w ...
»4,001 Days: The Major Hurricane Drought Continues
Also, The Hurricane Center Doesn’t Overestimate…But It Does Over-warn Today marks 4,001 ...
»Matthew Could Get Loopy, Hit Florida Twice
(UPDATED 7:25 a.m. EDT Thursday October 6) Several days ago, it seemed unlikely that Major Hurricane ...
»UAH Global Temperature Update for September 2016: +0.44 deg. C
September Temperature Unchanged from August NOTE: This is the eighteenth monthly update with our new ...


Date published: Thu, 01 Dec 2016 15:03:48 +0000
Details

»My Climate Plan, Wherein a Climate Skeptic Actually Advocates for A Carbon Tax
I am always amazed at how people like to draw conclusions about what I write merely from the title, ...
»Come See My Climate Talk on Wednesday Evening, February 24, at Claremont-McKenna College
I am speaking on Wednesday night at the Athenaeum at Claremont-McKenna College near Pomona on Wednes ...
»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 ...


Date published: Fri, 18 Mar 2016 16:20:20 +0000
Details

»An Open Letter to President Elect Trump on Global Warming
By Elmer Beauregard Dear President Elect Trump, First off let me say congratulations on you outstand ...
»Why Donald Trump Won | Bill Mitchell and Stefan Molyneux
»Trump wins U.S. Presidency! Climate Skeptics Rejoice! Set to dismantle & Defund UN/EPA climate agenda!
By: Marc Morano – Climate Depot Climate Depot publisher Marc Morano’s statement on President E ...
»Michael Moore’s “The Biggest F*** You In Human History” Speech
Michael Moore gave this speech as part of his new pro-Hillary movie which confused a lot of people. ...
»Now That World Government Has Been Achieved The Planet Can Start Cooling
By Elmer Beauregard Obama has done it, he has fulfilled his promise to  “fundamentally transfo ...


Date published: Sun, 04 Dec 2016 17:09:27 +0000
Details

»Centenary of the End of the Battle of the Somme
November 18 marks the centenary of the end of the Battle of the Somme, an event that passed essentia ...
»The Destruction of Huma Abedin’s Emails on the Clinton Server and their Surprise Recovery
Despite extraordinarily intense coverage of all aspects of Hillary Clinton’s emails, all comme ...
»Was early onset industrial-era warming anthropogenic, as Abram et al. claim?
A guest post by Nic Lewis Introduction A recent PAGES 2k Consortium paper in Nature, Abram et al., t ...
»Re-examining Cook’s Mt Read (Tasmania) Chronology
In today’s post, I’m going to re-examine (or more accurately, examine de novo) Ed Cook ...
»Esper et al 2016 and the Oroko Swamp
Jan Esper, prominent in early Climate Audit posts as an adamant serial non-archiver, has joined with ...
»Gergis and Law Dome
In today’s post, I’m going to examine Gergis’ dubious screening out of the Law Dom ...
»Joelle Gergis, Data Torturer
In 2012, the then much ballyhoo-ed Australian temperature reconstruction of Gergis et al 2012 myster ...
»Gergis
redirect to here
»Are energy budget TCR estimates biased low, as Richardson et al (2016) claim?
A guest post by Nic Lewis   Introduction and Summary In a recently published paper (REA16), Mar ...
»Deflategate: Controversy is due to Scientist Error
I’ve submitted an article entitled “New Light on Deflategate: Critical Technical Errors ...


Date published: Mon, 05 Dec 2016 22:04:16 +0000
Details




Date published: not known
Details

»Australian Govt. gifts votes to Pauline Hanson One Nation
The Pauline Hanson One Nation party (PHON) is the only party with a rational climate/carbon/electric ...
»What will future Sec. of Defence James Mattis make of leasing Darwin Port to the Chinese?
President Elect Trump chooses Ret. Gen. James Mattis as his new Secretary of Defence – 16 quot ...
»China objects to a Trump phonecall but fortifying international sandbanks is OK
Love that hypocrisy– Google will find hundreds of articles about China building fortifications ...
»What was I saying?
On 11 Nov 2016 I wrote – GreenLeft Australian Federal Govt messes with President Elect Trump ...
»For all the talk of heat on TV we have had several months of moderate temperature
When you hear all the yakka on TV about heatwaves, hottest this or that, hottest bushfire since?? ...
»Another reason for Australia to leave the GreenLeftie UN
ABC says – Barrier Reef at risk of winding up on UNESCO danger – Just do it – Aust ...
»Toxic mix of disasters could send Europe into death spiral
What is the GreenLeft Fairfax media at the NZ Herald talking about I thought, rising sea levels, air ...
»Return of $14,000 per MWh nightmare electricity prices to South Australia
Bit of a wind drought drives AEMO RRP into the stratosphere in SA – the interconnectors must b ...
»Graphic indication of Australian petrol price ripoff
There has to be a relationship between the cost of petrol in Australia and world oil prices. The ACC ...
»Decade long Canberra funded Tasmanian fox hunt likely hoax
Who would care? It is only mug Commonwealth taxpayers money. Fox hunt: Tasmania’s multi-millio ...


Date published: Mon, 05 Dec 2016 05:48:15 +0000
Details
Latest Forum Posts
Posted by tipografie digitala
Noi oferim clientilor nostri calendarele de imprim[more ...]
12/05 04:16

Posted by Anonymous
How to Recover lost SMS on Android? Android Device[more ...]
12/03 00:03

Posted by Anonymous
[ REQUIRES ADMIN APPROVAL ]
12/03 00:01

Posted by Anonymous
If you want to recover deleted data from iPhone, i[more ...]
12/02 23:59

Posted by Anonymous
[ REQUIRES ADMIN APPROVAL ]
12/02 23:57

Posted by Anonymous
[ REQUIRES ADMIN APPROVAL ]
12/02 23:55

Posted by Anonymous
How to Retrieve lost Data from Android? Deleted yo[more ...]
12/02 23:49

Posted by Anonymous
To recover lost iphone data, we can use an iphone [more ...]
12/02 04:04

Posted by Anonymous
With professional iPhone Text Message Recovery sof[more ...]
12/02 01:52

Posted by Anonymous
You can recover deleted text messages from iPhone [more ...]
11/30 00:49

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: 2143 | Replies: 1025 | Views: 7274813
Translate to: French German Italian Spanish Portuguese GTM_LAN_DUTCH Russian Chinese Arabic Korean English