Alan:
I agree with all you wrote - but I think it great also that we have
more papers all the time that are NOT behind a paywall. I am not taking this
personally - and am glad you responded below.
I have been a AAAS member for possibly 40 years and I get great value
from that annual expenditure for Science. I also this year found a sweet deal
for two subcategories of Nature. And I receive a dozen other magazines - a
few where I am a life member, and a surprising number that are free. I don't
subscribe to AMS and AGU because too little there that fits my background.
But in my small part of Geoengineering (biochar), I could be reading
four or five articles a day from perhaps up to 100 different journals - maybe
only one a month from AMS, AGU, and AAAS re biochar. No way anyone working in
biochar can cover all that (the IBI website has started showing the 10-20% of
unlocked papers every month - which I find helpful - and tend to read).
Re "Why are there so many complaints about "paywalls?" " I make a
point of mentioning paywalls only because it is such a joy when someone has
found a free-to-me way to help get their message out - and I presume readers
find that useful as well. Finding a long version in a thesis always pleases me
- and they are mostly free.
Re "Who do you expect to pay for the publication of scientific papers?"
- I agree with everything you say about the need for someone to pay. In many
cases, that should be the group that paid for the research to be performed.
That leaves many who can't - in particular in this case the University of
Alberta. So delighted they have a library.
I repeat that this particular thesis looks quite well done, and presume
the paper will also demonstrate that. I repeat that I agree with all you wrote
below.
Ron
> On Aug 4, 2018, at 11:44 AM, Alan Robock <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Dear Ron,
>
> Don't take this personally, but your email was a tipping point for me, and I
> have to respond. Why are there so many complaints about "paywalls?" Who do
> you expect to pay for the publication of scientific papers? The American
> Meteorological Society, American Geophysical Union, and American Association
> for the Advancement of Science are non-profits. Part of the cost of
> publication is paid by authors, and reviewers and most editors work for free.
> If you want them to give you the papers for free, the authors will have to
> pay even more. If you want the papers, join the AMS, AGU, and AAAS, and
> support our science. Pay for subscriptions to the journals. I have been a
> member of all three for my entire career.
> Alan
>
> Alan Robock, Distinguished Professor
> Editor, Reviews of Geophysics
> Department of Environmental Sciences Phone: +1-848-932-5751
> Rutgers University E-mail: [email protected]
> <mailto:[email protected]>
> 14 College Farm Road http://people.envsci.rutgers.edu/robock
> <http://people.envsci.rutgers.edu/robock>
> New Brunswick, NJ 08901-8551 USA
> ☮ http://twitter.com/AlanRobock <http://twitter.com/AlanRobock> 2017
> Nobel Peace Prize to ICAN!
> Watch my 18 min TEDx talk at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qsrEk1oZ-54
> <http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qsrEk1oZ-54>
> On 8/4/2018 1:24 PM, Ronal W. Larson wrote:
>> Andrew and list:
>>
>> Thanks for the lead.
>>
>> Believing that arctic ice loss is our best global indicator of how fast
>> we are heading to ever more serious climate problems, I've tried to follow
>> Arctic melting for the last 10-12 years (I just learned that 2018 is lagging
>> other years overall, but is in first place for the central Arctic basin -
>> the most important). So, disappointed that this paper is behind a pay wall,
>> I found by Googling that the paper is probably the result of this 2016
>> Master's thesis (his second Master's), downloadable at
>>
>> https://dspace.library.uvic.ca/bitstream/handle/1828/7669/Mueller_Bennit_MSc_2016.pdf?sequence=1
>>
>> <https://dspace.library.uvic.ca/bitstream/handle/1828/7669/Mueller_Bennit_MSc_2016.pdf?sequence=1>
>>
>> Possibly more here than in the paper. I have only skimmed the thesis,
>> but believe Mr. Mueller has described a new useful methodology. He
>> has pulled a lot of new information out of some pretty sketchy actual data
>> and huge amounts of modeled data.
>>
>> So, I hope that climate modelers will pay attention to this thesis as
>> a way to improve their models.
>>
>> Ron
>>
>>
>>> On Aug 4, 2018, at 7:35 AM, Andrew Lockley <[email protected]
>>> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
<snip; off topic>
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"geoengineering" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/geoengineering.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
