Article Corruption of the academic peer-review process (climate science)

[C C]

Corruption of the academic peer-review process
https://rogerpielkejr.substack.com/p/thi...publishing

EXCERPT: . . . To be clear, there is absolutely no allegation of research fraud or misconduct here, just simple disagreement. Instead of countering arguments and evidence via the peer reviewed literature, activist scientists[1] teamed up with activist journalists to pressure a publisher – Springer Nature, perhaps the world’s most important scientific publisher – to retract a paper. Sadly, the pressure campaign worked.

The abuse of the peer review process documented here is remarkable and stands as a warning that climate science is as deeply politicized as ever with scientists willing to exert influence on the publication process both out in the open and behind the scenes. (MORE - missing details)

- - - footnote - - -

[1] Science activism is surging – which marks a culture shift among scientists: "Science activism has long been considered taboo, as many in the field fear that politicizing science undermines its objectivity. Even so, scientist-activists have still managed to shape the U.S. political landscape throughout history [...] Two lessons emerge from our research thus far. First, our findings indicate that science activism may be gaining legitimacy within the scientific community. [...] As this newer generation of science activists moves into the profession, they will continue to shift the cultural norms of science."

[confused2]

Corruption of the academic peer-review process
https://rogerpielkejr.substack.com/p/thi...publishing

EXCERPT: . . . To be clear, there is absolutely no allegation of research fraud or misconduct here, just simple disagreement. Instead of countering arguments and evidence via the peer reviewed literature, activist scientists[1] teamed up with activist journalists to pressure a publisher – Springer Nature, perhaps the world’s most important scientific publisher – to retract a paper. Sadly, the pressure campaign worked.

The abuse of the peer review process documented here is remarkable and stands as a warning that climate science is as deeply politicized as ever with scientists willing to exert influence on the publication process both out in the open and behind the scenes. (MORE - missing details)

- - - footnote - - -

[1] Science activism is surging – which marks a culture shift among scientists: "Science activism has long been considered taboo, as many in the field fear that politicizing science undermines its objectivity. Even so, scientist-activists have still managed to shape the U.S. political landscape throughout history [...] Two lessons emerge from our research thus far. First, our findings indicate that science activism may be gaining legitimacy within the scientific community. [...] As this newer generation of science activists moves into the profession, they will continue to shift the cultural norms of science."

Could the amount of spoof climate science be a deliberate attempt to discredit 'real' science? We aren't the victims of bad or sloppy reporting - we're really the victims of a very effective propaganda campaign by 'people' with an interest in creating a smokescreen to hide the likely causes and effects of global warming.

Edit ..
Of Nature Communications - apparently one source of the 'Gulf stream stopping' story..
Starting October 2014, the journal only accepted submissions from authors willing to pay an article processing charge.
Who paid the 'article processing charge' (and why?)?

[C C]

Edit ..
Of Nature Communications - apparently one source of the 'Gulf stream stopping' story..
Starting October 2014, the journal only accepted submissions from authors willing to pay an article processing charge.
Who paid the 'article processing charge' (and why?)?

Depending on the circumstances, APCs are paid by "the author, the author's institution, or their research funder". The fees are supposedly necessary to make a paper available as open access. On very rare occasions, the fee is dropped in misfortune/austerity cases and difficulties with the particular country or region of origin. Paying it does not ensure the author keeps rights to the work.

[confused2]

Call me a conspiracy theorist if you like - I'm suggesting the corruption of climate science is a deliberate act by 'interests' who would prefer people to ignore the possibility of global warming. The increasing wokeness of science may be more the the result of good luck than good management but even so it helps to confirm that there are no facts - only politics.

[C C]

Call me a conspiracy theorist if you like - I'm suggesting the corruption of climate science is a deliberate act by 'interests' who would prefer people to ignore the possibility of global warming. The increasing wokeness of science may be more the the result of good luck than good management but even so it helps to confirm that there are no facts - only politics.

Well, the responses to climate change are politics. Whether it's the left recruiting a threat or apocalypse as justification for installing collectivist policies, or progressive capitalists recruiting it for profitable greenwashing and opportunities to illustrate what a saint an individual or company is, or conservative pundits seizing it as yet another item to crusade against for securing their careers, etc.