Another one ‘rocks the boat’, or in this case the orthodoxy enviro journals. This is my default position, and has been for some time, but I could not have said it so well.
Welcome to the club, Jim Bouldin, Bishop Hill reports: Quote of the day, Nature edition
My default position toward Nature…at least for earth and environmental science papers, has shifted from innocent until proven guilty, to roughly the opposite. I just don’t believe what they claim until I’ve read the paper involved closely, and since I don’t have time to do that, that means I basically don’t accept what they claim. I’ve just seen too much bad science and I don’t trust them to be fully objective and place scientific veracity over hype and headline. Sorry.
Jim Bouldin, an ecologist from UC Davis
You need to be very skeptical about science and the environment these days, agendas are everywhere and trust is AWOL.
Speaking of bad science, Mann’o’mann’s latest is full of bad science, Nic Lewis says he would have recommended rejection: Mann’s new paper recharacterizing the Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation
Professor Lennart Bengtsson shakes his head and says Science has become politicized …