Assembled by an anonymous source. Shared without comment.

Andrew


March 25, 2021
Frank Biermann publishes a blogpost concluding “Solar geoengineering is
wrong... Governments must take control. Solar geoengineering must be
stopped.”
https://www.frankbiermann.org/post/reflections-on-the-nas-report-on-solar-geoengineering-research

Spring 2021
Seventeen authors, led by Biermann and including Mike Hulme, submit “Solar
Radiation Management: The Case for a Non-use Agreement” to an unknown
journal. It is rejected.
https://twitter.com/TedParson4/status/1487879187549487109?s=20&t=QUVgPI4qGp7PAwXipHLtFA

Spring 2021, sometime later
Sixteen authors (the same as before but without Hulme) submit “Solar
Geoengineering: The Case for a Non-use Agreement” to WIREs Climate Change,
where Hulme is the editor-in-chief.

June 2021
Holly Buck reviews the submission to WIREs Climate Change, recommending
rejection. The emails to her from the journal are signed by Hulme.
https://twitter.com/hollyjeanbuck/status/1487159924291510274?s=20&t=QUVgPI4qGp7PAwXipHLtFA

June 29, 2021
Seventeen authors, the same as before but including Hulme, publish a letter
in Nature, “It is dangerous to normalize solar geoengineering research,”
which makes the same key points as the previous two submissions. It
concludes “We call on our governments and funding agencies to halt the
normalization of research into planetary solar-geoengineering technologies.
A global moratorium is needed.”
https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-01724-2

January 17, 2022
“Solar Geoengineering: The Case for a Non-use Agreement” is published in
WIREs Climate Change as a perspective, with the sixteen co-authors led by
Biermann. Hulme is listed not as an author but as the sole editor of the
article. (Other published WIREs Climate Change Perspectives list other
editors, implying that Hulme was the managing editor of the submission, not
listed simply because he is the journal’s editor-in-chief.)
https://wires.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/wcc.754
On the same day, the sixteen co-authors launch a sign-on letter, “We call
for an International Non-Use Agreement on Solar Geoengineering.” The
website states “The proposed non-use agreement is described in more detail
in an academic journal article in WIREs Climate Change, co-authored by 16
scientists and initiators of this call.”
Hulme is among the roughly 45 first signatories who are listed at that time.
https://www.solargeoeng.org/non-use-agreement/signatories/

January 19 to 27, 2022
Buck publishes a few Twitter threads and opinion essays that are critical
of the article and associated open letter.
https://twitter.com/hollyjeanbuck/status/1483898133599899654
https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2022/01/could-solar-geoengineering-be-a-force-for-peace.html
https://twitter.com/hollyjeanbuck/status/1486019933439934469
https://www.technologyreview.com/2022/01/26/1044226/we-cant-afford-to-stop-solar-geoengineering-research/
https://twitter.com/hollyjeanbuck/status/1486346180460171266

Biermann responds on his blog.
https://www.frankbiermann.org/post/solar-geoengineering-no-publicly-funded-research-without-a-plan-for-global-governance

January 28, 2022
Buck says that she was a reviewer of the WIREs Climate Change submission,
recommended rejection, and did not receive any further response. She
further says that Hulme was both her point of contact for this review and
notes that he was a co-signatory of the Nature Correspondence.
https://twitter.com/hollyjeanbuck/status/1487159924291510274

January 29, 2022
At 3:16 PM GMT, Biermann responds to Buck’s concerns by pointing out that
the article is a Perspective, not a research article. He mentions that “We
received 3 positive reviews & 1 critical one”, i.e. Buck. (WIREs Climate
Change Perspectives are typically reviewed by only three peers.)
https://twitter.com/FHBBiermann/status/1487444590667997187

At 6:15 PM GMT, another of the article’s authors (Saleem Ali) responds to
Buck’s concerns by saying that “We were very conscious of this and the
editor of the journal recused himself completely from the review process.
@FHBBiermann managed that to ensure objective review… Some emails are
auto-generated with editor's email. A response to reviewers was prepared -
sometimes journals don't share that back with reviewers.”
https://twitter.com/saleem_ali/status/1487491424761397256
Notably, Biermann did not assert this when he responded on this issue three
hours before. The tweet with the first part of the above quotation is
deleted sometime in the next 36 hours. A screenshot is available.
https://twitter.com/geoengineering1/status/1488066192854114311/

January 30, 2022
Ted Parson confirms that the Spring 2021 submission had seventeen authors,
including Mike Hulme.
https://twitter.com/TedParson4/status/1487879187549487109

-- 
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 view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/geoengineering/CAJ3C-05mYxGM%3DkpzaZ2FFLpv5zFutO6T%3DXdP5PmXiQ25axUsGQ%40mail.gmail.com.

Reply via email to