Climate science must now fit into "preapproved narratives" to receive publication by notable scientific journals, according to Dr. Patrick T. Brown.

Following the publication of his paper studying the impact of climate change on wildfires in Nature, the climate scientist said he left out the full results of his studies to ensure its place in the prestigious journal.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/technology/climate-scientist-admits-editing-paper-to-fit-preapproved-narratives/ar-AA1gix2R?ocid=msedgdhp&pc=U531&cvid=0d98e24bfbae4c018c88ffbd880152f8&ei=14

ScottW

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 9/6/23 11:31 AM, ScottW wrote:

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/technology/climate-scientist-admits-editing-paper-to-fit-preapproved-narratives/ar-AA1gix2R?ocid=msedgdhp&pc=U531&cvid=0d98e24bfbae4c018c88ffbd880152f8&ei=14

How Dr Brown self-edits is his own business.

https://patricktbrown.org/2022/02/14/overestimating-the-human-influence-on-the-economic-costs-of-extreme-weather-events/

How much damage can be attributed to the marginal increase in event
intensity due to anthropogenic climate change?

Something to consider while reading the news from Greece, where an
abnormal heat wave led to widespread wildfires, followed by a potential Mediterranean hurricane causing to catastrophic floods.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)

On 9/6/23 12:25 PM, mINE109 wrote:

On 9/6/23 11:31 AM, ScottW wrote:

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/technology/climate-scientist-admits-editing-paper-to-fit-preapproved-narratives/ar-AA1gix2R?ocid=msedgdhp&pc=U531&cvid=0d98e24bfbae4c018c88ffbd880152f8&ei=14

How Dr Brown self-edits is his own business.

https://patricktbrown.org/2022/02/14/overestimating-the-human-influence-on-the-economic-costs-of-extreme-weather-events/

You jinxed yer dude by posting here!

https://andthentheresphysics.wordpress.com/2023/09/07/they-made-me-do-it/

"[T]he reviews are public and it certainly seems that at least one of
the reviewers highlighted the nuances that Patrick claimed would prevent
this paper from being published. Not only did the authors’ response
claim that their narrow framing was appropriate, this also doesn’t
appear consistent with the suggestion that only certain narratives are acceptable to this scientific community."

https://static-content.springer.com/esm/art%3A10.1038%2Fs41586-023-06444-3/MediaObjects/41586_2023_6444_MOESM2_ESM.pdf

"I have several concerns with the methodology applied in the study, and
can thus not recommend this study for publication in Nature at the
moment. It is however possible that a very substantially revised article
could address these concerns and I thus would encourage the authors
to consider resubmitting after very substantial revisions if these are possible. The main concerns are related to the following aspects:

1) The climate change scenario only includes temperature as input for
the modified climate. However, changes in atmospheric humidity would
also be highly relevant for predicting changes in VPD or fuel moisture."

From authors' response:

"Accounting for changes in all of these variables and their potential interactions simultaneously is very difficult. This is precisely why we
chose to use a methodology that addresses the much cleaner but more
narrow question of what the influence of warming alone is on the risk of extreme daily wildfire growth."

"Much cleaner" is a ways from self-editing to conform to editorial a
priori assumptions.

--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: fsxNet Usenet Gateway (21:1/5)