More Polar bear-gate: Wife was peer reviewer

From Human Events:

In particular, investigators are asking questions about the peer review work on Monnett’s drowned polar bear paper, which was done by his wife, Lisa Rotterman, as well as Andrew Derocher, the lead researcher on the Canadian study under review by the inspector general’s office…

With investigators suggesting his research is collapsing, Monnett was defensive in the interview, and asked for the inspectors’ credentials to question his work or second-guess his calculations.

For example, there was some confusion as to whether it was three or four dead bears used in the calculation to determine the ratio of survival, and whether Monnett assumed that four swimming bears seen the week earlier were the same polar bears recorded as dead in the next survey. The statistic in question was the percentage of bears likely to survive when swimming in a storm—Monnett estimated it to be around 25%, whereas investigators put the number at more than 57%.

Is there a potential we made a mistake, and the peer reviewers didn’t catch it? Possibly,” Gleason said.

So what part of climate alarmism isn’t scam-like?

3 thoughts on “More Polar bear-gate: Wife was peer reviewer”

  1. A familiar tactic of people who are lying is to make personal attacks on the person or institution making the criticism. Now we are into non-denominational territory. Don’t respond to the facts, just tell me I am a bad person. That works. Dennis

Comments are closed.