3 ms·

What is the antecedent of "them" in your quote of Jones?

• jgrahamc 17y ago
  http://eastangliaemails.com/emails.php?eid=419 http://eastangliaemails.com/emails.php?eid=419 The other paper by MM is just garbage - as you knew. De Freitas again. Pielke is also losing all credibility as well by replying to the mad Finn as well - frequently as I see it. I can't see either of these papers being in the next IPCC report. Kevin and I will keep them out somehow - even if we have to redefine what the peer-review literature is !
  • pingswept 17y ago
    Yeah, that's pretty bad.
    • alextp 17y ago
      I'm not so sure---I mean, I've sure read some papers that I'd love never to have been published, even if that means tweaking peer review a bit. EDIT: in a sense that the results are obviously false and come from either some ideological stand by the author or from some crude conceptual mistake that is hard to respond to.
  • avolkov 17y ago
    Evil climate scientists conspiring to prove global warming. Yeah right, this all looks like a private correspondence expressing personal opinions, and how the hell this thing could be treated as sinister?
• deleted 17y ago
  [deleted]