Climategate Blacklist In Action?

Share Button

A few months ago, there was a peer reviewed paper that many skeptics felt was a precursor to blacklisting climate scientists who didn’t tow the warmist doom-and-gloom party line. Criticisms are aired here, here, and most notably here, which explains why Climate expert Dr. Rodger Pielke Sr should not even be on the “skeptic” side of the list. He believes in man-made global warming, but splits with the crowd on exact causes (thinks that land use contributes more that is recognized) and  what the repercussions might be (thinks the consensus is somewhat exaggerated toward the negative, ignoring the possible positive results). Well, we may very well have seen the fruits of that paper come to fruition. From Dr Pieilke’s web site yesterday:

I was invited by Nature magazine to write a Letter in response to the September Exeter meeting http://www.surfacetemperatures.org/home, and have been working with a member of their staff on edits over the past two weeks.

This morning, I received the startling e-mail below from Nature’s Chief Commissioning Editor. Quite frankly, the only way I can interpret this behavior is as an example of the continued bias in Nature’s reporting of climate issues. Their statement that “We have now reflected on the matter, and on some information from attendees at the meeting in question” is a remarkable admission.

Here’s the actual letter:

Dear Professor Pielke,

Thank you very much for taking the time to write to Nature, upon request. And for the revisions you’ve made, again at our request.

We have now reflected on the matter, and on some information from attendees at the meeting in question. We have, I’m afraid concluded that we cannot offer publication on this occasion. We feel that there are too many nuances to this situation to be properly communicated by a short item (or items) on our letters page.

We will however continue to track the evolving story for news or leaders, as appropriate.

We apologise for having taken up your time in this way.

Sincerely,

Sara Abdulla
Chief Commissioning Editor
Opinion [incl Correspondence and Books & Arts]
Nature

Again:

“We have now reflected on the matter, and on some information from attendees at the meeting in question. We have, I’m afraid concluded that we cannot offer publication on this occasion.”

Hmm. I wonder, which side of the list do you think these attendees might have been on?

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

Leave a Reply