![]() | ||
2011-06-21 09:54:11 | Lindzen and Choi have revised their paper on sensitivity | |
John Cook john@skepticalscience... 121.222.9.229 |
Just got this email:
| |
2011-06-21 10:18:52 | ||
Albatross Julian Brimelow stomatalaperture@gmail... 199.126.232.206 |
Asia-Pacific Journal of Atmospheric Sciences is not a reputable journal and it has a very low impact factor, lower than E&E, IIRC. Moreover, they have faield to address the ocncerns identified in their previous paper and in their submission to PNAS. Epic fail for Lindzen. | |
2011-06-21 11:50:35 | ||
dana1981 Dana Nuccitelli dana1981@yahoo... 69.230.102.37 |
Yeah, actually an AGU journal rejected the paper first. Then Lindzen submitted the PNAS, trying to slip it through with a "pal review". But PNAS gave the paper a serious review, and the referees absolutely demolished it. So then finally he submitted it to this extremely obscure journal. As Alby says, he didn't address any of the criticisms of the original LC09 paper. Definitely epic fail. Eli has a good discussion of the events. | |
2011-06-28 10:58:35 | Is it worth updating the rebuttal to reflect on this new paper? | |
John Cook john@skepticalscience... 121.222.9.229 |
Perhaps a blog post and some or all of it be added to the rebuttal. | |
2011-06-28 13:47:05 | ||
dana1981 Dana Nuccitelli dana1981@yahoo... 71.137.108.93 |
Yeah, would probably be worth some discussion. grypo discussed it a bit in his draft post |