In the wake of recent Global Warming studies that have turned out to be....shall we say deficient, you hear a lot of talk about "Peer Review". When the East Anglia University emails surfaced, Global Warming advocates told us that the key was "Peer Review". The studies they relied on were subject to "Peer Review", you see. Thus, the "science is settled" in the words of Al Gore. Well, recently, we have seen surface another "scientific study" in California that was apparently "reviewed" by some of the people who had participated in the study. So I must say that I am less than impressed by all this talk of peer review.
Here is how the whole process works as I see it:
Step 1: The study is submitted.
Step 2: The study is reviewed:
"Looks OK to me."
Step 3: The study is reviewed again by a panel of "peers".
"It's unanimous, gentlemen. The science is settled."
Step 4: The results are published.
Step 5: Nobel Prizes are awarded.
Step 6: Laws are passed.
Step 7: Then we find out it's all.....
All one big vicious circle if you ask me.
Oh, by the way, you simply MUST read this wonderful book. I reviewed it myself. Two thumbs up as they say.
3 comments:
Verdict?
Gary Fouse doesn't understand the peer review process.
Will he take the time to learn what it actually is?
Doubtful.
Well, recently, we have seen surface another "scientific study" in California that was apparently "reviewed" by some of the people who had participated in the study.
To which study are you referring? Not to the one about the glaciers, right? Because in the article itself that you posted, it clearly stated that it was NOT peer reviewed.
And if you do mean that, it was a peer review process that exposed it as being bunk. (And again, the point that you conveniently ignore is that it was scientists who accept man-created global warming who pointed out the errors.)
Ahhh...you're still not going to get it, are you?
Lance,
It was the reg by CARB requiring diesel vehicle owners to reconfigure their engines, based on a study by a guy named Hien Tran that Linked diesel particulate matter in the air with 3500 premature deaths in one year. (How do you determine that?) Tran is a fraud who hada phd from a diploma mill in London run by a pedophile fugitive from the US.
I have two recent articles about it. Reportedly 6 of the 12 reviewers were part of the study.
What peer review exposed the East Anglia study? It was a bunch of computer hackers that revealed it. And the glacier study may not have been peer reviewed but it was good enough for the Nobel committee.
Post a Comment