A Geek With Guns

Chronicling the depravities of the State.

So Much for Peer Review

without comments

The climatgate won’t close. The IPCC has claimed that their 2007 study, which is under severe scrutiny, was peer-reviewed. Peer-reviewed, I don’t think that word means what you think it means:

The first report centred directly on the IPCC itself. When several of the more alarmist claims in its most recent 2007 report were revealed to be wrong and without any scientific foundation, the official response, not least from the IPCC’s chairman, Dr Rajendra Pachauri, was to claim that everything in its report was “peer-reviewed”, having been confirmed by independent experts.

But a new study put this claim to the test. A team of 40 researchers from 12 countries, led by a Canadian analyst Donna Laframboise, checked out every one of the 18,531 scientific sources cited in the mammoth 2007 report. Astonishingly, they found that nearly a third of them – 5,587 – were not peer-reviewed at all, but came from newspaper articles, student theses, even propaganda leaflets and press releases put out by green activists and lobby groups.

So much for the scientific process.

Written by Christopher Burg

April 27th, 2010 at 7:23 am