Chronology | Current Month | Current Thread | Current Date |
[Year List] [Month List (current year)] | [Date Index] [Thread Index] | [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] | [Date Prev] [Date Next] |
Having now had a chance to look at the commentary and the paper. I agree with you, John.
This paper should never have made it through the peer review process. As, I think, most of
us know, the peer review process leaves a lot to be desired. With this paper, people took the
time to give this a proper review and posted their thoughtful comments online. It would be
nice if people also did this with the more standard climate science papers as well. People
tend to dismiss quickly anything that runs contrary to their opinion, rather than taking a closer
look.