2011-04-21 14:40:01DIBS THREAD
Alex C


All right, so to make the process of bringing in PopTech's papers easier and so we all know who is taking care of which ones so that there are no duplicates, we'll quantize the papers someone can bring in at a time.  This thread will be for calling dibs on groups of 20 papers at a time.  I have already myself done the first 40, and have placed my lists with my results in this and this thread with requests for second opinions on ones I am not sure about.

So some basic notes:

- Groups are based off of packets of 20 papers in the Excel spreadsheet John made available here, so groups ranging from 2-21, 22-41, 42-61, so on.

- Listing is alphabetized by paper title, in ascending order.

- Go ahead and call dibs on which groups you want - take as many as you'd like, just specify which ones you are taking.


Since we are categorizing PopTech's list, and if anyone remembers how PopTech is about criticism, we need to make sure that each placement is without a doubt correct.  Place papers based on their position on the issue of AGW - if they don't take a stance, then they are neutral.  Do not base categorizing off of what arguments they might support or refute, but do group the papers with arguments that pertain to them.  We need to make sure that we keep it to the science so PopTech cannot hide behind the semantics of journal quality or standards, or bring up red herrings.

That being said, regarding if papers have been peer reviewed:

- We are not including E&E papers yet as their status of peer reviewed is dubious at best,

- If based on the abstract of a paper, you cannot tell whether it is peer reviewed, then set it off to the side and ask for second opinions.  I'm sure others would be willing to lend suggestions.

2011-05-05 08:10:40
Alex C


Well OK, I've got the first 60 (have already gone through the first 40).  I'll check for repeats too in case anyone else (Ari, Rob) have already started adding these papers, purposefully or inadvertently.