ThirstyBarbarian
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Feb 11, 2013
- Messages
- 12,249
- Reaction score
- 7,483
In another thread, I mentioned a "bombshell" study related to the rate of melting of the Greenland and Antarctic ice-sheets would be released this week, and members asked me to post a link when it was ready. Here it is: https://www.atmos-chem-phys-discuss.net/15/20059/2015/acpd-15-20059-2015.html
The link takes you to a page where you can read an abstract, download a pdf or xml copy of the entire paper, see comments and discussion of the paper, and also see related papers.
A few caveats:
I'm hoping to get a chance to read some of this tonight. Take a look!
The link takes you to a page where you can read an abstract, download a pdf or xml copy of the entire paper, see comments and discussion of the paper, and also see related papers.
A few caveats:
- The "Blockbuster Bombshell" title of the thread is meant as irony. We won't know how important this study is until we've read and evaluated it, and that is going to take some time, but already some news outlets are hyping it. Let's be better than that. If the study is accurate and the findings are true, then it is indeed a very important "bombshell" discovery with some very serious implications, but we really don't know yet.
- I have not read the study, so I do not have an opinion on it yet.
- In addition to its scientific findings, the study seems to state a policy position related to government and international action on climate change. I make it a rule for myself not to take policy and political positions on this forum, so I will not be debating policy, just science. I'd recommend others take the same approach of avoiding that controversy on this forum. There's plenty of other places to vent about that kind of thing. Please stick to what you of think the study and its scientific conclusions.
- The study is being released through a non-conventional channel. Instead of a peer-reviewed paper being released though a peer-reviewed scientific journal, the study is a "discussion paper" released through an "open-access journal." Other scientists will be posting comments, asking questions, linking to other studies, making arguments, etc., the study authors will be responding, and the public can watch the entire process unfold. This is not the way it is usually done, but I think is going to be very interesting to see a peer-review process unfold in real time --- it is usually handled privately before a study gets published, so we'll be seeing a process we don't usually get to see. It won't be like the comments section on HuffPo or the Daily Caller, but there may be some "science nerd drama." Also, because the review process has not really been conducted yet, findings should be taken with a grain of salt --- the findings have not be well-scrutinized yet. Most likely there will be a follow-up paper published by the authors after the open-access process runs its course, and the authors have time to consider the issues that get brought up.
- The lead author is James Hansen who is considered by some to be a controversial figure in climate science. He is a scientist who often takes what some consider to be an activist role in climate policy debate. What you may think about Hansen is really beside the point for purposes of discussing the science of the report. Whether you like him or dislike him is irrelevant to whether the study is sound, so I'd ask that you set your opinion of him aside and avoid ad-hominem arguments about the study. Stick to science, please.
I'm hoping to get a chance to read some of this tonight. Take a look!