Page 3 of 14 FirstFirst 1234513 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 140
Thanks Tree62Thanks

Thread: Study Finds Temperature Adjustments Account For ‘Nearly All Of The Warming’ In Climat

  1. #21
    El Psy Kongroo Lunchboxxy's Avatar
    Joined
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    11,216
    Thanks
    11162

    From
    Oregon
    Quote Originally Posted by RNG View Post
    You link to who the editors are but nowhere did I see anything that says they are who does all the peer review. As a matter of fact, they also, in your link, give a long list of learned climate researchers in the area of climate change. My guess is they are listed because they often are chosen to do peer reviews.

    Did you read your link?

    And on what basis do you claim that only the editors do the peer reviews?
    Like those 4 dudes alone have time to peer review the 1000s of articles they get a year and publish a journal. Lawl.

  2. #22
    Banned Camp
    Joined
    May 2012
    Posts
    55,852
    Thanks
    10186

    From
    By the wall
    Quote Originally Posted by Lunchboxxy View Post
    Like those 4 dudes alone have time to peer review the 1000s of articles they get a year and publish a journal. Lawl.
    Publications do not peer review 1000's of papers a year lol.

    And what exactly do you think a peer review is? A complete replica of the actual study?

    It isn't.

    They read over the paper and give their opinion on whether the research looks legitimate or if they think it may contain flaws, they DO NOT verify results.

    How many papers could you read and grade in a year?

  3. #23
    Banned Camp
    Joined
    May 2012
    Posts
    55,852
    Thanks
    10186

    From
    By the wall
    Quote Originally Posted by RNG View Post
    You link to who the editors are but nowhere did I see anything that says they are who does all the peer review. As a matter of fact, they also, in your link, give a long list of learned climate researchers in the area of climate change. My guess is they are listed because they often are chosen to do peer reviews.

    Did you read your link?

    And on what basis do you claim that only the editors do the peer reviews?
    Oh you are misunderstanding me.

    The people who do the formal peer review are really irrelevant. Generally nobody knows who they are because they are kept anonymous. You rarely discover their names or how many there are because its all controlled by the editors.

    The editors decide which papers will get sent out, who and how many people they allow to read it, and whether or not to use any of the particular reviewers comments or to ignore them. Its the editor that controls the peer review, not the guys reading the paper and giving their comments, those guys are only an additional source for the editors to consider.

    It is the editors that conduct the actual peer review.

    For example, I tried to get on the list as a formal peer reviewer for two journals and if I had been accepted I would have periodically been sent work or pieces of work to read over and give comments on regarding whether the research appeared valid. The editors may tell me who is trying to publish, what the overall subject matter is or they may not, I only comment on what they would send me and they are in no way bound to base their decisions off of what I say.

    It's like asking your buddy to read your dissertation and tell you what he thinks of it before you present it to your panel for defense, the guys that will actually tell you if its acceptable or not.

    Sometimes editors will send out papers or parts of them but they aren't required to, only if they want clarification on a part they need to comment on that they may not have the expertise to answer themselves.

    The editors right the acceptance or denial of all peer reviews for their publication, nobody from the outside.

  4. #24
    Veteran Member ptif219's Avatar
    Joined
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    59,871
    Thanks
    3942

    Quote Originally Posted by BigLeRoy View Post
    Try reading THIS, instead; because your OP is GARBAGE. It is pseudo-scientific hogwash.

    https://www.sciencedaily.com/release...0118112554.htm

    From the link: Earth's 2016 surface temperatures were the warmest since modern recordkeeping began in 1880, according to independent analyses by NASA and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA).
    Globally-averaged temperatures in 2016 were 1.78 degrees Fahrenheit (0.99 degrees Celsius) warmer than the mid-20th century mean. This makes 2016 the third year in a row to set a new record for global average surface temperatures.

    The link also points out that 16 of the hottest 17 years in recorded history have occurred since 2001, with the El Nino year 1998 being the ONLY exception.

    Your OP just got EXPLODED. In front of your nose.

    Hope you still have at least some of your nose left.
    So now peer review is garbage? The OP shows facts how the environmentalist whales are manipulating data to falsely show warming

  5. #25
    Veteran Member ptif219's Avatar
    Joined
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    59,871
    Thanks
    3942

    Quote Originally Posted by Lunchboxxy View Post
    Do you even know what peer review is?

    The font and typesetting in that "report" alone is enough to show it's not published in a peer reviewed journal. It's frankly an abomination.

    So peer review only matters what it supports the democrats agenda. You show the double standard and hypocrisy of democrats. You show why the people say the democrats are out of touch

  6. #26
    Veteran Member ptif219's Avatar
    Joined
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    59,871
    Thanks
    3942

    Quote Originally Posted by RNG View Post
    When and where did you ever shopw peero review is flawed?

    On many threads

  7. #27
    Veteran Member ptif219's Avatar
    Joined
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    59,871
    Thanks
    3942

    Quote Originally Posted by RNG View Post
    I did. I suspect you did not understand it or it's significance.

    You definitely didn't understand how flawed it is.
    You mean how flawed it proves the climate change data is

  8. #28
    El Psy Kongroo Lunchboxxy's Avatar
    Joined
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    11,216
    Thanks
    11162

    From
    Oregon
    Quote Originally Posted by Spookycolt View Post
    Publications do not peer review 1000's of papers a year lol
    Uh yeah they do.

    Science alone only publishes 7% of manuscripts recieved.

    Science/AAAS | Science Magazine: About the Journal: Information for Authors: Contributors' FAQ

    And what exactly do you think a peer review is? A complete replica of the actual study?

    It isn't.
    I literally just linked you a website about how peer review works. I'm also a working scientist. I'm fully aware of the peer review process.

    They read over the paper and give their opinion on whether the research looks legitimate or if they think it may contain flaws, they DO NOT verify results.

    How many papers could you read and grade in a year?
    That's an overly simplistic way of describing how it works. The scientists doing the actual peer reviewing (i.e. Not the editors) pour over every word of the paper. They want to make sure the methodology adds up. That the data matches the results. That causation makes sense. It's a long process that can sometimes take years.
    Thanks from BigLeRoy, Blues63 and Panzareta

  9. #29
    El Psy Kongroo Lunchboxxy's Avatar
    Joined
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    11,216
    Thanks
    11162

    From
    Oregon
    Quote Originally Posted by ptif219 View Post
    So peer review only matters what it supports the democrats agenda. You show the double standard and hypocrisy of democrats. You show why the people say the democrats are out of touch
    Again, that "report" isn't peer reviewed. It doesn't appear in any academic journal.
    Thanks from BigLeRoy, RNG and Friday13

  10. #30
    Radical Centrist BigLeRoy's Avatar
    Joined
    Jan 2016
    Posts
    26,140
    Thanks
    21598

    From
    Colorado
    Quote Originally Posted by ptif219 View Post
    So now peer review is garbage? The OP shows facts how the environmentalist whales are manipulating data to falsely show warming
    The 'paper' linked in your OP is NOT peer-reviewed, and the 'facts' it reported were just blown up in your FACE by the link I gave you. There has been NO pause in global warming. If anything, the evidence says that global warming is ACCELERATING.

    You're just not very good at sensing when your claims have been blown up right in front of you.

Page 3 of 14 FirstFirst 1234513 ... LastLast

Similar Threads

  1. Study finds autism link
    By bajisima in forum Current Events
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 12th June 2015, 12:11 PM
  2. Study finds honesty is healthy
    By Divine Wind in forum Healthcare
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 19th November 2012, 08:55 AM
  3. Study finds GOP men and women more feminine in looks
    By Seraphima in forum Political Discussion
    Replies: 10
    Last Post: 9th October 2012, 12:57 PM
  4. New study finds that racists are stupid
    By zitiboy in forum Political Discussion
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 31st January 2012, 10:00 AM
  5. Uninsured More Likely to Die, Study Finds
    By Bourne in forum Political Discussion
    Replies: 48
    Last Post: 23rd September 2009, 04:09 AM

Tags for this Thread


Facebook Twitter RSS Feed