Sentences with phrase «flawed papers»

How did a deeply flawed paper, which contradicts mainstream science on climate change, pass peer review?

At this point, you may be wondering how such a tremendously flawed paper made it through the peer review process.

There may also be flawed papers agreeing with the mainstream view, but they have little effect on the gap of perception between the public perception and the scientific consensus.

None of the «M» s are scientists, between them they've published what, one deeply flawed paper in total?

Kevin, climate4you is run by Ole Humlum, who has written a number of deeply flawed papers on climate science, so pointing out that the plot originates from climate4you rather than WUWT does not make it any more authoritative.

About one - third of the journals targeted in this sting are based in India — overtly or as revealed by the location of editors and bank accounts — making it the world's largest base for open - access publishing; and among the India - based journals in my sample, 64 accepted the fatally flawed papers and only 15 rejected them.

A very badly flawed paper which is being very actively disputed by even the climate alarmists scientists he wrongly cites as being in agreement with it?

The Soon and Baliunas paper was so bad that half of the Climate Research journal editorial staff resigned in protest because the seriously flawed paper should never have passed peer review.

Despite being a deeply flawed paper which drew conclusions which were contrary to what their work actually showed, Marotzke & Forster 2015 may be informative.

And the EPA answered that directly, by saying that it is OK for scientists to write to people about flawed papers.

The first week of September began with the editor of Remote Sensing resigning in order to take responsibility for publishing Roy Spencer's fundamentally flawed paper.

Unless they accepted them tactically to give them a get - out clause in which case they were naive for submitting a knowingly flawed paper.

[DC: The «peer review corruption» I am most concerned about is that which allows publication of deeply flawed papers from the likes of lobby group allies like researchers Soon and Baliunas (Climate Research, back in 2003) or McLean et al (GRL, last year).]

But a single, apparently flawed paper wielded by a think tank and a vocal online community can sometimes drown out the scientists.

The fact that Lindzen is able to get an obviously flawed paper published is a warning that peer review isn't perfect, but also an indication that far from the contrarian case being suppressed, it gets published even if it's rubbish.

Benestad still cites what he knows to be a fatally flawed paper.

A number of review editors resigned as a reaction against the publication of what they regarded as a seriously flawed paper.

Unusually, the deeply flawed paper was published in a supposedly peer - reviewed science journal.

The consultant concluded that, despite the flawed papers, the trial could proceed «without any risk to patients.»

This could have been usefully added (and can be seen here), and in any case was admitted by McKitrick in yet another flawed paper on the topic earlier this year.

Following the all - too - familiar pattern, this deeply flawed paper was heavily promoted by special interests as somehow challenging the scientific consensus that humans are altering the climate (an excellent account is provided by science journalist Dan Vergano of USA Today here).

A tweet in President Obama's name had assumed that the earlier, flawed paper, by John Cook and others, showed 97 % endorsement of the notion that climate change is dangerous:

It was a flawed paper that cherry - picked data to claim pre-industrial CO2 level was 270 ppm.

«They submitted a flawed paper,» said Hans von Storch, editor - in - chief of the journal, Climate Research.

We expect that scientific papers in general form networks by citing one another, and it is interesting to ask whether conclusions drawn in flawed papers are independent of each other or if errors propagate through further citation.

Give me a flawed paper, and within a day I will pick up several of those flaws and indicate what they mean for the paper.