You just can’t help yourself can you? Broad sweeping statements lacking all substantiation.

Actually I am as much asking questions here as I am making any kind of statement and all you can do is retreat to arguments about semantics

1. Can you tell me what you think a “peer review panel” is, and nominate an instance of one so I can understand your point – I don’t think you have any idea how the peer review process works

Semantics aside why don’t you explain as someone who claims to be in the science game Just why the we should not be worried by what is revealed in the emails about the peer review process. As I understand it the whole point of peer review is check that the methodology in any paper is acceptable and that it is argued in a clear and cogent manner.

2. Can you give me a clear instance of “pressure”

Read the emails JM

3. The coding comments you refer to are actually an implementation of the ‘trick’ we were discussing earlier. So what is it:- a storm in a teacup that is not much to worry about when it appears as a discussion of what to do, but “very blatant trickery” when it appears as a coding comment? Make up your mind

The dichotomy is your own invention here JM so you explain what you mean please.

BTW – I find it amusing to be lectured on software development by a hack journalist. Comments frequently have nothing to do with the actual code (although I don’t think that’s the case here)

WTF are you on about here JM?

Teacup meet Storm….

HJ…..yeah whatever…..

Iain, so if this is the ogga booga ‘SCIENTIFIC CONSPIRACY’ finally being revealed for the world to see, then how do we and our governments make any policy that needs to be based on science?

Perhaps we could just have opinion writers like Bolt cage fight Tim Flannery and the winner gets to advise the government.

Or do you actually have any suggestion as to how policy on the climate and the environment should be made?

Oh and BTW, I won a bet based on the content your last (predictable) response….thanks.

Bolt = Fail = Non-event.

Of course there are those willing to deny that he’s just an ordinary fellow behind a curtain with levers and smoke and you it appears are one of those. As I asked earlier, who is in denial now?

You just can’t help yourself can you? Broad sweeping statements lacking all substantiation.

1. Can you tell me what you think a “peer review panel” is, and nominate an instance of one so I can understand your point – I don’t think you have any idea how the peer review process works

2. Can you give me a clear instance of “pressure”

3. The coding comments you refer to are actually an implementation of the ‘trick’ we were discussing earlier. So what is it:- a storm in a teacup that is not much to worry about when it appears as a discussion of what to do, but “very blatant trickery” when it appears as a coding comment? Make up your mind

BTW – I find it amusing to be lectured on software development by a hack journalist. Comments frequently have nothing to do with the actual code (although I don’t think that’s the case here)

The ‘trick’ comment which you concede is a storm in a teacup is in fact the major point that all your denialist mates are focussing on as the major point.

And you’re on pretty thin ice describing private discussions as “manipulation of the “peer review” process is a far more significant scandal because it goes to the heart of the claims of veracity for all science and scientific publication. [my bold]”

That’s a pretty big claim. Are you really saying that a few private emails containing private opinions expressed in a loose and vernacular way as threatening the veracity of all science?

All science? All publication? Wow. I’m impressed, even for trollish commentary that’s pretty extreme.

This isn’t a new development ?
We all know there are massive bucks involved in climate change research. Billions ! So, to hear that research is being distorted, is not a surprise. It’s not a new concept, hell, even the tobacco companies distorted cancer research for years, trying to hide the dangers of their products. It happens also in the drug industry. That is why drugs are taken off the market, years after release, when side effects, found in initial research and then hidden, are found ?

I am on the “front line” as you know Iain, and I would not be surprised one little bit, if some “white-coat”, was taking the figures that I produce, and twisting them, to suit some whacked out computer model somehow. Actually, I would be surprised if it wasn’t happening ? Hell, one only has to look at Howard and the Tampa, in recent history, to see how raw data can be twisted to suit a political goal ?

As to climate change. I have been doing this job for nearly twenty years, and I see daily the results of climate change. BUT , even with the science available at my disposal, it is fun to watch the egg-heads argue over the raw data I give them. Sometimes, I just switch off, or worse, want to just bang their heads against each other. For people who are so “educated”, you sit there, wondering what they are smoking, when you hear some of the whacked out conclusions, as to the conclusions that they come up with ?

When that community comes out with a substantiated/proven consensus, about what is happening, and why, then I will listen. Until then, I will take my lucrative multi million dollar per year contract, play jets, travel the Pacific Rim, and smile !

Good on ya guys and gals, keep going, you are making my life a pleasure to live, and like my companions here, making us happy beyond our wildest expectations.