Climategate tactics continue: Journal editor 'resigns' after publishing skeptic paper

As reported by the BBC, climate alarmists remind journal editors of the price of publishing papers by skeptics.

The editor’s lame-o excuse for “resigning” was,

The problem is that comparable studies published by other authors have already been refuted…, a fact which was ignored by Spencer and Braswell in their paper and, unfortunately, not picked up by the reviewers.

But if this were an actual standard of the modern scientific community (especially when it comes to climate), there would be few, if any, employed science journal editors.

4 thoughts on “Climategate tactics continue: Journal editor 'resigns' after publishing skeptic paper”

  1. It will be very interesting when some time passes and we get the rest of the story.

    A lot of scientists have been following the AGW line for decades, and more than a few are reaching retirement age. You know that there are more than enough grudges to go around.

    I wonder how many tell-all books are being written right now?

  2. The skeptic blogs have been burning up on this all weekend (e.g., WUWT and Climate Etc.) , and Roy Spencer himself has commented on his own blog about the ridiculous resignation.

    It is quite plainly obvious from comments by the editor Wolfgang Wagner and by a trio of AGW promoters (namely Kevin Trenberth and friends) that Wagner had a professional conflict of interest external to the journal and was unable to resolve that conflict in any other manner but to resign.

  3. However, the paper was not retracted. I cannot fathom a situation where the editor would resign but not retract. His resignation letter is also reminiscent of Mark Antony’s speech from Julius Caesar (I come not to praise Caesar but to bury him, etc). He issues condemnation of his actions while explaining how they were correct, and his words seem quite clearly chosen to not actually refute anything that was said by Spencer.

    After reading the letter, I can see no other explanation than that the Editor resigned rather than cave into pressure to retract the paper.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.