tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8216971263350849959.post7574633811219517709..comments2023-08-07T16:41:49.660+02:00Comments on Die Klimazwiebel: A Tale of Two Consensuseduardohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17725131974182980651noreply@blogger.comBlogger22125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8216971263350849959.post-40905477917498607822010-01-09T07:42:13.842+01:002010-01-09T07:42:13.842+01:00@20 - the link to the survey has been corrected. S...@20 - the link to the survey has been corrected. Should be "klickable" now. Thanks for pointing out.Hans von Storchhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08778028673130006646noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8216971263350849959.post-10009795283020178602010-01-08T22:24:10.717+01:002010-01-08T22:24:10.717+01:00@Dennis Bray,
I do not doubt it. What i was tryin...@Dennis Bray,<br /><br />I do not doubt it. What i was trying to say was that when you are writing a paper, you will (to an extent) put away your personal feelings and concentrate purely on your results/research <i>Within the narrow focus of your expertise</i>. So the two agregates are not comparable...<br /><br />When you ask for the scientists opinion on the broad field, you will get another result than when you examine the agregate of narrow focused views. <br /><br />This is also reflected in the answer to you that they didn't feel qualified (which to me says in the broad aspects)<br /><br />Hope that makes i clearer. I btw. find the surveys both interesting and enlightening.Kim Dabelstein Petersenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17722809257228519047noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8216971263350849959.post-24734219142436582012010-01-08T17:10:55.857+01:002010-01-08T17:10:55.857+01:00The link to your results appears broken at this ti...The link to your results appears broken at this time, would love to read it.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8216971263350849959.post-77104970706493556312010-01-08T14:04:34.663+01:002010-01-08T14:04:34.663+01:00To Kim D P (16, 17)
I believe the papers used in ...To Kim D P (16, 17)<br /><br />I believe the papers used in Oreskes' analysis had authors. Authors tend to be human too. Humans have feelings. Feeling shape what they write (or don't write) - at least on some occassions. Anyway, I used the list of authors used for the Oreskes analysis as a partial list of respondents for the survey and pretty much asked them directly the same question that focused Oreskes' work. Incidently, some of these authors contacted me directly saying they did not feel qualified to respond as they were not climate scientists.Dennis Braynoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8216971263350849959.post-63884339988612809332010-01-08T01:39:23.908+01:002010-01-08T01:39:23.908+01:00They say different things, but would not always pu...They say different things, but would not always put an average of papers over an average of guesses. For instance, I would rather bet on an election using the market-generated Tradesports odds, than based on published journalists analyses.<br /><br />Note: This in no way says that literature is not useful. It absolutely is. And I flay McIntyre for his cowardly and lazy reluctance to fight fair by recording his objections in easy to read and archived literature papers. It's just that contributions to the opus of science are not really the same thing as overall assessments.TCOnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8216971263350849959.post-9772586951181618522010-01-07T23:17:59.802+01:002010-01-07T23:17:59.802+01:00To be more clear: Any given individual will have a...To be more clear: Any given individual will have a limited overview of a situation, and thus his or her feeling on a specific topic, may not be correspond to the sum of knowledge. Imho this is an inherent aspect of multi-disciplinary studies.Kim Dabelstein Petersenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17722809257228519047noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8216971263350849959.post-63305738510249438782010-01-07T22:21:46.900+01:002010-01-07T22:21:46.900+01:00I'm not actually surprised by the difference i...I'm not actually surprised by the difference in Oreskes results and your survey, since you are measuring two different things.<br /><br />Oreskes measured what published papers said.<br />While the survey measured feelings.<br /><br />The agregate of published science is not by necessity the same as the agregate of feelings. Isn't this the reason that we do assessment reports to see what the sum of published literature says? Instead of relying on the personal opinions of (for instance) a panel of experts.Kim Dabelstein Petersenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17722809257228519047noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8216971263350849959.post-21140675977530600692010-01-06T20:13:17.084+01:002010-01-06T20:13:17.084+01:00@Dennis
Sure. Advertisers first select a magazine ...@Dennis<br />Sure. Advertisers first select a magazine that matches their demographic, and then they pay extra to have their ad appear next to an article that reinforces their message or their image.richardtolhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14239680555557587153noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8216971263350849959.post-58845891966282470832010-01-06T20:13:05.616+01:002010-01-06T20:13:05.616+01:00Talking about consensus, this could be an interest...Talking about consensus, this could be an interesting question for the next survey:<br /><br /><i>- How convinced are you that a scientific consensus on the reality of dangerous AGW is a positive factor for climate science financing?</i>Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8216971263350849959.post-28896195427908492062010-01-06T20:06:01.426+01:002010-01-06T20:06:01.426+01:00I am also guilty of often being pugnacious. I hav...I am also guilty of often being pugnacious. I have actually restrained myself from several provacative postings, because I knew they would drag down the character of the blog. That said...I've let some get through as well...and was wrong to do so.<br /><br />P.s. I lost 70 pounds in last 6 months...and also lifted 6 days a week for same period, getting 40% strength increase. I am pretty ripped although not a ginormous height. High school wrestling and boxing was a while ago, but if you need a champion for the streets..;)TCOnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8216971263350849959.post-62869381112175174132010-01-06T18:22:38.526+01:002010-01-06T18:22:38.526+01:00to Georg 2:
Georg, for sure you are a tough guy, b...to Georg 2:<br />Georg, for sure you are a tough guy, but this is not a schoolyard. You call Dennis 'whiny', and recently you called one of my contributions simply 'dumb'. If you want to be a bit of a bully, just go out on the streets and have a fight there. Here in this blog we use other kind of arguments. So please follow the basic rules of politeness, or else shut up.Werner Krausshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15094636819952421339noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8216971263350849959.post-36540562444138639842010-01-06T16:58:00.709+01:002010-01-06T16:58:00.709+01:00It may indeed be a matter of a symptom rather than...It may indeed be a matter of a symptom rather than a cause. I would not dispute this statement as I don't know. But as someone who wants to advertise would I not seek out a journal (in this case) that is congruent with the corporate image I wish to maintain? I would not advertise a peace concert in Soldier of Fortune. And as a journal with an establised image would I not refrain from jeopardizing this image, thus risking losing established clients who are attracted by the image portrayed by the journal. For example, it is doubtful that the Vatican Times (should it exist) would advertise condoms. <br /><br />As for Chris D's pondering, all results for the 2008 survey, which includes the questions in question, can be found at http://coast.gkss.de/staff/storch/pdf/CliSci2008.pdfDennis Braynoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8216971263350849959.post-38491201458521274262010-01-06T15:40:34.900+01:002010-01-06T15:40:34.900+01:00I have to wonder what these results would look lik...I have to wonder what these results would look like were they to be conducted today.Chris D.noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8216971263350849959.post-62599921947455605362010-01-06T15:37:25.787+01:002010-01-06T15:37:25.787+01:00I also see more symptom than cause.
Of interest...I also see more symptom than cause. <br /><br />Of interest, GE has made a major push to get all its businesses aligned to getting federal $$ advantages. They have been public about it. Immelt even said, "we are all Democrats, now".TCOnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8216971263350849959.post-83086508058173057442010-01-06T14:30:07.773+01:002010-01-06T14:30:07.773+01:00I do believe that Nature and Science are biased, b...I do believe that Nature and Science are biased, but I doubt it is because they want to please their advertisers. Their brand is too strong, and the risk to their reputation is too great.<br /><br />Should journals advertise? Of course! It keeps down the costs of subscriptions.<br /><br />I edit a journal, Energy Economics, that runs adverts. The people who advertise with us try and sell books or software -- the sort of thing the reader of an academic journal may want to buy.<br /><br />The fact that Science and Nature run ads of a more generic kind suggests that their readership is no longer purely academic. Therefore, Science and Nature are no longer purely academic journals.<br /><br />I thus agree with Dennis' verdict, but I think that ads are a symptom rather than a cause.richardtolhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14239680555557587153noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8216971263350849959.post-87689314724657662642010-01-06T11:34:59.344+01:002010-01-06T11:34:59.344+01:00Re: Georg
This isn't a case of sour grapes, j...Re: Georg<br /><br />This isn't a case of sour grapes, just an observation. As for you being unaware of what GE is, I can't be blamed for that: General Electric (GE), is, I would say, a fairly significant global corporate player. I don't understand your comment that 'GE does not exist'. But as another reader commented'C'est la vie.'Dennis Braynoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8216971263350849959.post-88380824799487749602010-01-06T03:39:24.000+01:002010-01-06T03:39:24.000+01:00Dr. Bray, this is a very interesting post, but I t...Dr. Bray, this is a very interesting post, but I think you have misread the dynamics here. I have commented in more depth on my own <a href="http://adaptalready.blogspot.com/2010/01/agenda-of-science-magazine.html" rel="nofollow">page</a>.<br /><br />Science may have corporate advertisers, but it is technically a non-profit entity. Science's advocacy role in promoting science explains the relationship a little better, I feel.<br /><br /> Whether tracking government funds, supplying the government with employees, representing the interests of government funded scientists, or educating the public about the importance of science, the involvement of AAAS in science is heavily, heavily political.Ryanhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00276214657479942215noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8216971263350849959.post-15116338935929492002010-01-05T20:49:20.072+01:002010-01-05T20:49:20.072+01:00I wasn't going to read this, but I'm glad ...I wasn't going to read this, but I'm glad I did. Mr Bray presents a structure I was not aware of. Too bad the coal industry doesn't advertise in Science. At least we'd get some balance in the science. "Whose bread one eats, whose words one speaks".P Gosselinnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8216971263350849959.post-64770671025451990202010-01-05T20:25:18.424+01:002010-01-05T20:25:18.424+01:00GE : http://www.ge.com/
Nº 1 on Forbes list:
ht...GE : http://www.ge.com/<br /><br />Nº 1 on Forbes list:<br /><br />http://www.forbes.com/lists/2009/18/global-09_The-Global-2000_Rank.html<br /><br />And I wouldn't say you need a big conspiracy (as with "The Team") for each business to know their best economic interest. Even for each individual.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8216971263350849959.post-7098371868605715532010-01-05T20:17:40.786+01:002010-01-05T20:17:40.786+01:001. There are (for sure) a lot of people who compl...1. There are (for sure) a lot of people who complaing of not getting into Science/Nature. <br /><br />2. I hope in your case, you published elsewhere. If it is a worthwhile contribution to the peer-reviewed lit, it is still worthwhile even if not published in comment form within Science. If you have not done so, you are delinquent.<br /><br />3. Science and Nature have earned a rep for ego science and for some frauds (Bell Labs, stem cells, even one that I know of that is not public but in "sexy electronics"). I think for people doing serious work, fine if they want to occasionaly get a feather in the cap with a Science/Nature posting. But they should not let the seduction of that eliteness lure them from writing good stuff in PRL or more specialized journals.<br /><br />4. I can beleive that Science/Nature are greenwashing. For instance, I would "Bayesian bet" that if the first Science article had been yours and Oreskes had a counter-comment to the "green side", that they would have made sure to get it in. But c'est la vie.<br /><br />5. But also, really, they have a tendancy to limit real discussions of methodology. Both in papers themselves and in comments. Again...if you have a valid point, it should be put into the archived literature. And there are a bazillion places to put it.TCOnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8216971263350849959.post-17927564220400463002010-01-05T18:07:21.378+01:002010-01-05T18:07:21.378+01:00If everyone who didnt get published an article in ...If everyone who didnt get published an article in Science starts whining like you the world becomes a graveyard. As a first orientation if your hypotheses on the big conspiration in Science and Nature really takes place have a look on this list<br />http://www.forbes.com/lists/2007/18/biz_07forbes200_The-Global-2000_Rank.html<br />GE (whatever that is) does not exist and for just 0.05% of BPs or Exxons turnover they buy Nature and Science and you, if needed.Georghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07807390701146588135noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8216971263350849959.post-53384638218386349192010-01-05T17:23:15.124+01:002010-01-05T17:23:15.124+01:00The advertisers highlighted all demonstrate the &q...The advertisers highlighted all demonstrate the "correct" orthodoxy. If they had a different message, would Science accept them? I expect not, as they would not be in keeping with the editorial line. <br /><br />Does advertising have a place in an academic journal? Yes, provided it is honest and does not influence the articles and editorial. <br /><br />The real question is, is Science still an academic journal? Is not it's content selection heavily biased by editorial prejudice (not just in environmental matters)?<br /><br />It seems to me that Journals such as Nature or Science should not be read without awareness of political bias, anymore than one would newspapers such as The Guardian or The Telegraph in the UK.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com