Even if we have to redefine what the peer-review literature is
Phil Jones to Michael Mann: "I can’t see either of these papers being in the next IPCC report. Kevin and I will keep them out somehow — even if we have to redefine what the peer-review literature is!”
Immediately related elementsHow this works
-
Anthropogenic Climate Change »Anthropogenic Climate Change
▲
Human impact on the Earth's climate? »Human impact on the Earth's climate?
▲
Case for significant anthropogenic forcing remains unclear »Case for significant anthropogenic forcing remains unclear
▲
IPCC process, science and modelling are flawed »IPCC process, science and modelling are flawed
▲
IPCC process isn't wholly reliable »IPCC process isn't wholly reliable
▲
Hacked emails raise questions about flaws in the scientific process »Hacked emails raise questions about flaws in the scientific process
▲
Hacked email suggests desire to suppress papers challenging orthodoxy »Hacked email suggests desire to suppress papers challenging orthodoxy
▲
Individuals/small groups can't exclude peer-reviewed papers from IPCC »Individuals/small groups can't exclude peer-reviewed papers from IPCC
▲
Peer-review process has been corrupted »Peer-review process has been corrupted
▲
Discussed keeping papers out of IPCC report »Discussed keeping papers out of IPCC report
■
Even if we have to redefine what the peer-review literature is
+Commentaires (0)
+Citations (0)
+About