At 09:56 AM 5/7/2010, Jed Rothwell wrote:
See:
http://sti.srs.gov/fulltext/SRNS-STI-2009-00825.pdf
Wow! Our friend Shanahan finally got published again. This is good
news, actually, quite good. Shanahan is nuts, but he's the best the
skeptics have at this point. I've been suspecting that peer-reviewed
publications have been rejecting skeptical papers as of low quality.
This is one that got through to the Journal of Environmental
Monitoring, which had published a paper by Krivit and Marwan. I think
at this point that we can assume that Shanahan's paper is the best they got.
http://newenergytimes.com/v2/news/2010/35/3566shanahan-jem-response.pdf
Thanks for pointing it out this response, Jed. It's generally good,
except where he uses it as a platform to attack the heat/helium
results based on his own unsupported analysis. And that may be where
he ran into problems with getting it published, where he couldn't
come to an agreement with the editor of the journal. Or it was in the
attacks on Shanahan? How is it relevant how many words Shanahan has
written on Wikipedia? Krivit is a sensationalist journalist, with an
axe to grind. He's become a protagonist in this field and has lost
his journalistic objectivity, he treats his own research as
established fact. This would be a problem even if he was right.
