Obama’s Former Science Official: ‘Climate
Science Is Not Settled’
Royal Society In Trouble Over False
Extinction Claim Paper
It was presented as shocking evidence of the damage being done by climate change: a species driven to extinction because of a decline in rainfall in its only habitat. Now the “rediscovery” of a species of snail is prompting questions about the role played by the Royal Society, Britain’s most prestigious scientific institution, in raising false alarm over an impact of climate change. --Ben Webster, The Times, 20 September 2014
The Royal Society journal refused to publish the rebuttal, saying it had been “rejected following full peer review”. The journal sent Mr Hambler the reviews of the rebuttal by two anonymous academic referees, who had rejected the criticisms made of Mr Gerlach’s paper. However, the Royal Society admitted this week, after questions from The Times, that the referees who had rejected the rebuttal were the same referees who had approved Mr Gerlach’s paper for publication. The society said it had since changed its policy on reviewing rebuttals… The society has refused to publish the rebuttal because it is seven years old. --Ben Webster, The Times, 20 September 2014
Society should listen to the majority consensus opinion of expert scientists. The emphasis I place on consensus of expert scientists is sometimes not understood by those not fully aware of how science works. --Sir Paul Nurse, President of the Royal Society, Trust in Science, 26 June 2014
The idea that “Climate science is settled” runs through today’s popular and policy discussions. Unfortunately, that claim is misguided. It has not only distorted our public and policy debates on issues related to energy, greenhouse-gas emissions and the environment. But it also has inhibited the scientific and policy discussions that we need to have about our climate future. --Steven E. Koonin, The Wall Street Journal, 20 September 2014
No comments:
Post a Comment