Jeg indrømmer det gerne: Jeg har–fagligt set–ikke en fløjtende fis forstand på klima-spørgsmålet. Både flere af mine med-Punditokrater og nogle af vore læsere vil så let som ingenting kunne sejle mig agterud i en debat, hvis jeg bevæger mig udover nogle snusfornuftige, mere videnskabsfilosofiske betragtninger krydret med lidt public choice analyse.
Her er et par af mine foretrukne e-mail fra den lækkede fil:
“Well I have my own article on where the heck is global warming ? We are asking that here in Boulder where we have broken records the past two days for the coldest days on record. We had 4 inches of snow. The high the last 2 days was below 30F and the normal is 69F, and it smashed the previous records for these days by 10F. The low was about 18F and also a record low, well below the previous record low. … The fact is that we can’t account for the lack of warming at the moment and it is a travesty that we can’t. The CERES data published in the August BAMS 09 supplement on 2008 shows there should be even more warming: but the data are surely wrong. Our observing system is inadequate.“
“This was the danger of always criticising the skeptics for not publishing in the “peer-reviewed literature”. Obviously, they found a solution to that–take over a journal! So what do we do about this? I think we have to stop considering “Climate Research” as a legitimate peer-reviewed journal. Perhaps we should encourage our colleagues in the climate research community to no longer submit to, or cite papers in, this journal. We would also need to consider what we tell or request of our more reasonable colleagues who currently sit on the editorial board …”