James Annan wrote:
> James Annan wrote:
>
> > Peer review is definitely flawed and IMO best viewed as, like democracy,
> > merely the least bad of the alternatives.
>
> "Flawed" may sound stronger than I meant (which is merely that it
> doesn't always get things right). I don't offer any solutions, although
> the EGU system is an interesting one.
>
> James

Yes, I also had memories of some incidents in mind -- cold fusion, the
S Korean human cloning debacle, Soon & Balliunas -- but forged ahead
with that statement.

What I intended to say was that the public wants a simple shorthand
way of determining good science from bad science. Deniers have
successfully muddied the water by creating a parallel universe of
denial literature. Here in NZ, the Climate Science Coalition

http://www.climatescience.org.nz/

has a web site full of spurious links. To the untrained eye, this is
all scientific evidence (note the huge numbers of pdf files; sad to
say, but that gives credibility.)

Now IANACS, but I have a question: I often read on sites like
RealClimate etc, that this or that sceptics' study was published in an
"obscure" journal. How do you know which journals are better rated?

I'm asking because I'm studying (from a social science point of view)
the way people talk about climate change in media and on blogs, and am
thinking this would be a useful metric for my analysis.


--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
Global Change ("globalchange") newsgroup. Global Change is a public, moderated 
venue for discussion of science, technology, economics and policy dimensions of 
global environmental change. 

Posts will be admitted to the list if and only if any moderator finds the 
submission to be constructive and/or interesting, on topic, and not 
gratuitously rude. 

To post to this group, send email to [email protected]

To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]

For more options, visit this group at 
http://groups.google.com/group/globalchange
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to