Monday, March 29, 2010

The peer reviewed literature has spoken

ABC appears to be lumbered with a denialist Chairman, so it's perhaps only to be expected that they have promoted the foil-hat conspiracy theories of McLean regarding the rejection of his nonsensical attempt at a reply.

Now Stephan Lewandowsky has a good article up on the ABC site on the topic, discussing how peer-reviewed literature is fallible but still paints an overwhelming picture on climate change:
"The article by McLean and colleagues is a perfect example of the fallible but self-correcting nature of peer reviewed science.

Although the authors loudly proclaimed to the media that their work shows that 'no scientific justification exists for emissions regulation' and that it 'leaves little room for any warming driven by human emissions', these claims have now been shown to be wishful thinking at best, and mendacious propaganda at worst.

The Journal of Geophysical Research is publishing a devastating rebuttal of Mr McLean's work, authored by a team of nine of the world's leading climate scientists from Japan, the UK, the US, and New Zealand.

This rebuttal uncovered numerous errors and, most crucially, it unambiguously showed that the paper by McLean and colleagues permitted no conclusions about global warming, let alone the lack thereof.


Peer reviewed science is fallible but self-correcting."
Go and read the whole thing - and add a comment too.


P. Lewis said...

There was a reference by mike (29 Mar 2010 5:44:19pm) in the comments following Stephan Lewandowsky’s fine piece that took my eye.

The reference was to the Viewpoint article by Diethelm and McKee entitled ‘Denialism: what is it and how should scientists respond?’ in the European Journal of Public Health, 19, 2–4.

It bears reading. Like Stephan’s piece, I don’t think it says anything that “anyone” sane doesn’t already appreciate, but it encapsulates the situation fairly succinctly … to me anyway.

Word verification "medork". I hope not!

P. Lewis said...

Oops! "meidiot".

Should have given the Viewpoint link!

EliRabett said...

So, does Eli have permission to put out the press release? Or you wanna do it

crf said...

What will it take for the press to abandon their climate-conspiracy angle?

Dan Brown printing an op-ed that this is too tenuous a plot for even he to credibly cobble into a novel for the fan-base, let alone a best-seller?

Anonymous said...

McLean whinges further on ABC's The Drum. In response to a reader's comment he comes up with this classic quote "If the SOI accounts for short-term variation then logically it also accounts for long-term variation."

No, he really said that. Yes I know the date...

Chris S.