Comments on: A Questionable Paper Published, an Editor Resigns…What Else is New? http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/intersection/2011/09/06/a-questionable-paper-published-an-editor-resigns-what-else-is-ne/ Tue, 27 Sep 2011 17:28:30 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.4.2 By: Bob Koss http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/intersection/2011/09/06/a-questionable-paper-published-an-editor-resigns-what-else-is-ne/#comment-57194 Bob Koss Wed, 07 Sep 2011 01:30:55 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/intersection/?p=20939#comment-57194 I think Wagner was between a rock and a hard place. The S&B paper passed peer review and hasn't been withdrawn. If Internet postings can cause editors to resign they evidently have reached an equal or higher status than formal peer review. Or perhaps there is something going on behind the scenes. The oddity of Wagner resigning over publication of S&B and at the same time issuing a personal apology to Trenberth crys out for further explanation. I suggest Wagner might be worried about Trenberth's ability to exert a negative impact on Wagner's work with the International Soil Moisture Network. Trenberth just happens to be Chairman of GEWEX which provides support for Wagner's work. #4 The Daily Climate is published by Environmental Health Services which says Michael Mann is advising them over the next year while he is on sabbatical from Penn State. That Trenberth was able to get his puerile screed published there is unsurprising. You may notice Trenberth is the only author on that piece who can reasonably claim to be climate scientist. http://pielkeclimatesci.wordpress.com/2011/09/04/hatchet-job-on-john-christy-and-roy-spencer-by-kevin-trenberth-john-abraham-and-peter-gleick/ I think Wagner was between a rock and a hard place. The S&B paper passed peer review and hasn’t been withdrawn. If Internet postings can cause editors to resign they evidently have reached an equal or higher status than formal peer review. Or perhaps there is something going on behind the scenes.

The oddity of Wagner resigning over publication of S&B and at the same time issuing a personal apology to Trenberth crys out for further explanation. I suggest Wagner might be worried about Trenberth’s ability to exert a negative impact on Wagner’s work with the International Soil Moisture Network. Trenberth just happens to be Chairman of GEWEX which provides support for Wagner’s work.

#4
The Daily Climate is published by Environmental Health Services which says Michael Mann is advising them over the next year while he is on sabbatical from Penn State. That Trenberth was able to get his puerile screed published there is unsurprising. You may notice Trenberth is the only author on that piece who can reasonably claim to be climate scientist.

http://pielkeclimatesci.wordpress.com/2011/09/04/hatchet-job-on-john-christy-and-roy-spencer-by-kevin-trenberth-john-abraham-and-peter-gleick/

]]> By: Somite http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/intersection/2011/09/06/a-questionable-paper-published-an-editor-resigns-what-else-is-ne/#comment-57193 Somite Tue, 06 Sep 2011 22:51:40 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/intersection/?p=20939#comment-57193 No problem Hugo! The conversation is what's important. No problem Hugo! The conversation is what’s important.

]]> By: Incredulous http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/intersection/2011/09/06/a-questionable-paper-published-an-editor-resigns-what-else-is-ne/#comment-57192 Incredulous Tue, 06 Sep 2011 22:02:23 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/intersection/?p=20939#comment-57192 It happens in all scientific reporting. The press puts out some wild junk in an interpretation of some paper (that they often have no real idea about) and it gets spewed out on the news wires. I just cringe when I hear the news with the stuff that is done in medicine. That said, I think the editor is being a drama queen. If the paper is bad, retract it. If the science is bad rebut it. Resigning as editor accomplishes nothing except getting a bit of press over it. It happens in all scientific reporting. The press puts out some wild junk in an interpretation of some paper (that they often have no real idea about) and it gets spewed out on the news wires. I just cringe when I hear the news with the stuff that is done in medicine.

That said, I think the editor is being a drama queen. If the paper is bad, retract it. If the science is bad rebut it. Resigning as editor accomplishes nothing except getting a bit of press over it.

]]> By: Hugo Schmidt http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/intersection/2011/09/06/a-questionable-paper-published-an-editor-resigns-what-else-is-ne/#comment-57191 Hugo Schmidt Tue, 06 Sep 2011 21:23:21 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/intersection/?p=20939#comment-57191 I know - that's why my face is red. Sorry about all this. I know – that’s why my face is red.

Sorry about all this.

]]> By: Somite http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/intersection/2011/09/06/a-questionable-paper-published-an-editor-resigns-what-else-is-ne/#comment-57190 Somite Tue, 06 Sep 2011 21:09:17 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/intersection/?p=20939#comment-57190 Those are different journals. "Remote Sensing of Environment" is 3+. Remote Sensing still doesn't register an IF. Those are different journals. “Remote Sensing of Environment” is 3+. Remote Sensing still doesn’t register an IF.

]]> By: Hugo Schmidt http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/intersection/2011/09/06/a-questionable-paper-published-an-editor-resigns-what-else-is-ne/#comment-57189 Hugo Schmidt Tue, 06 Sep 2011 20:53:04 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/intersection/?p=20939#comment-57189 GAH! Okay, that's me eating crow. On the list I originally looked up the Cryosphere, it confused Impact Factor and SNIP. When I looked up Remote Sensing on Elsevier, I got it mixed up with Remote Sensing of Environment. Boy is my face red... GAH! Okay, that’s me eating crow.

On the list I originally looked up the Cryosphere, it confused Impact Factor and SNIP. When I looked up Remote Sensing on Elsevier, I got it mixed up with Remote Sensing of Environment.

Boy is my face red…

]]> By: Somite http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/intersection/2011/09/06/a-questionable-paper-published-an-editor-resigns-what-else-is-ne/#comment-57188 Somite Tue, 06 Sep 2011 20:07:30 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/intersection/?p=20939#comment-57188 The paper used as a basis for the blog post on skeptical science is this: http://www.the-cryosphere-discuss.net/4/233/2010/tcd-4-233-2010.html from a journal with an impact factor of 3.641. What is your reference for the IF of Remote Sensing? According to this list it doesn't even register: http://www.aboutgis.com/gis-and-remote-sensing-journal-list-with-impact-factors/ The paper used as a basis for the blog post on skeptical science is this:

http://www.the-cryosphere-discuss.net/4/233/2010/tcd-4-233-2010.html

from a journal with an impact factor of 3.641. What is your reference for the IF of Remote Sensing? According to this list it doesn’t even register:

http://www.aboutgis.com/gis-and-remote-sensing-journal-list-with-impact-factors/

]]> By: Hugo Schmidt http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/intersection/2011/09/06/a-questionable-paper-published-an-editor-resigns-what-else-is-ne/#comment-57187 Hugo Schmidt Tue, 06 Sep 2011 19:49:40 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/intersection/?p=20939#comment-57187 I hate to be contentious about this, but remember this? http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/intersection/2011/06/08/debating-michael-shermer-and-bjorn-lomborg-on-climate-risks/ So, <blockquote>Any well trained science journalist knows that one study proves nothing—precisely because of motivated reasoning, confirmation bias, and so on. </blockquote> Could this, perchance, apply to the following? http://www.skepticalscience.com/what-co2-level-would-cause-greenland-ice-sheet-collapse.html A journal with an impact factor of 0.115. Compared with 3.951 for <i>Remote Sensing</i>. I hate to be contentious about this, but remember this?

http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/intersection/2011/06/08/debating-michael-shermer-and-bjorn-lomborg-on-climate-risks/

So,

Any well trained science journalist knows that one study proves nothing—precisely because of motivated reasoning, confirmation bias, and so on.

Could this, perchance, apply to the following? http://www.skepticalscience.com/what-co2-level-would-cause-greenland-ice-sheet-collapse.html

A journal with an impact factor of 0.115. Compared with 3.951 for Remote Sensing.

]]> By: Joe http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/intersection/2011/09/06/a-questionable-paper-published-an-editor-resigns-what-else-is-ne/#comment-57186 Joe Tue, 06 Sep 2011 19:18:20 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/intersection/?p=20939#comment-57186 Living in the upper midwest my whole life, I've seen the affects of climate change first-hand. I've also fought very hard to keep even the mentioning of intelligent design out of our public schools. As far as injecting newborns and infants with bolus doses of organic mercury (autism-vaccines), that's where we split paths Chris. Living in the upper midwest my whole life, I’ve seen the affects of climate change first-hand. I’ve also fought very hard to keep even the mentioning of intelligent design out of our public schools. As far as injecting newborns and infants with bolus doses of organic mercury (autism-vaccines), that’s where we split paths Chris.

]]> By: Nullius in Verba http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/intersection/2011/09/06/a-questionable-paper-published-an-editor-resigns-what-else-is-ne/#comment-57185 Nullius in Verba Tue, 06 Sep 2011 19:07:01 +0000 http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/intersection/?p=20939#comment-57185 #4, It seems quite remarkable that they can draw such conclusions even before the paper is published! That's even better than drawing final conclusions after only one study! #4,

It seems quite remarkable that they can draw such conclusions even before the paper is published! That’s even better than drawing final conclusions after only one study!

]]>