Elsewhere on this page you can read about Congressman Lamar Smith’s continuing witch hunt against professional scientists.
Smith’s newest claim is that “whistle blowers” have come forward to allege that a recent NOAA study of global temperature was “rushed” for political purposes.
Editors of the journal Science, one of the most respected on the planet, which published the study, tell us, not so much.
The escalating struggle between an influential House Republican and government scientists over their pivotal study of global warming now turns on accusations that they rushed to publish their findings to advance President Obama’s agenda on climate change.
But a spokeswoman for Science, the prestigious peer-reviewed journal that in June published the paper by climate scientists at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, said in an interview that their research was subject to a longer, more intensive review than is customary.
“This paper went through as rigorous a review as it could have received,” said Ginger Pinholster, chief of communications for the American Association for the Advancement of Science, which publishes Science. “Any suggestion that the review was ‘rushed’ is baseless and without merit.”
She said the paper, submitted to the journal in December, went through two rounds of peer review by other scientists in the field before it was accepted in May. The number of outside reviewers was larger than usual, and the time from submission to online publication was about 50 percent longer than the journal’s average of 109 days, Pinholster said.
During the review, the research was sent back to NOAA for revision and clarification, she said. And because it was based on such an “intensive” examination of global temperature data, the reviewed was handled by one of the journal’s senior editors, she said, “so it could be more carefully assessed.”
It’s good to have actual evidence that Lamar Smith was lying. His ploy didn’t pass the sniff test, but without something like this, just a suspicion. The nose knows.
Best,
D
Its more than that. This is clear evidence that Lamar Smith isn’t qualified to hold his position. Seriously, how stupid do you have to be to insist something was ‘rushed to publication’ that received 50% more review time than normal Science publications? The public can forgive 10% or even 20%, but this is clear evidence that Smith just doesn’t want to get his facts straight before wasting the public’s money.
It’s not necessarily stupidity. He’s well paid to make such comments.
There’s no doubt that he’s stupid and unqualified and relies on being fed by staffers and lobbyists. Just as there’ no doubt that he’s “well paid” both in salary and perks and dirty campaign money. There’s no doubt that he’s wasting the public’s money, either.
All that is irrelevant. The real “stupidity” lies with the people who voted for him and put him in office. And with all the other “conservatives” across the country who elect people like Smith and Inhofe and keep the Repugnant Party alive.
Smith is going to go down in flames here, and the “folks back home” will love him for “standing up against that Commie Fascist Socialist Obummer and Big Guv’mint that wants to steal their freedom”
Looks like a textbook case of Dunning-Kruger. To the letter.