Some time ago, some people wrote a comment on our "multiple constraints" GRL paper. We originally thought it could be safely ignored (beyond the public comments we added), but one or two people asked about it, so we eventually penned a reply, which has now been published here. It didn't seem to us that the comment was very useful - they didn't seem to like the approximations we made (and clearly flagged), but didn't provide any evidence (or even argument) that the approximations made by others were any better, and didn't provide their own analysis either.
CP does not adopt the widespread policy of inviting a reply to be reviewed and published alongside the comment, but instead invite the commentee to add a public review. That sounds ok in theory, but it means we didn't get to see or critique the revised version before publication, as the review process goes underground at that stage. I was particularly peeved at their unfounded potshots at our more recent Climatic Change paper.
Anyway, it seems like ancient history now, though there has still been very limited effort to address the issues we raised...
No comments:
Post a Comment