Climate Scientist Claims He Got Article Published in Notable Journals by Advancing Their Preferred Narrative
I just got published in Nature because I stuck to a narrative I knew the editors would like. That’s not the way science should work.”
Isn’t this how is works in the vast majority of the mainstream media these days?
The College Fix reports:
Scientist says he left out ‘full truth’ to get climate change paper published
A climate scientist has outed two of the nation’s top science journals for what he contends is their bias for publishing papers that support the narrative that human activity is the primary cause of extreme climate change while ignoring other factors.
Patrick Brown, co-director of the Climate and Energy Team at the Breakthrough Institute and a lecturer in the Energy Policy and Climate Program at Johns Hopkins University, wrote that editors of journals like Nature and Science actively work to publish research that fits a certain narrative.
To get published, Brown wrote in The Free Press, researchers must produce findings “that the effects of climate change are both pervasive and catastrophic and that the primary way to deal with them is not by employing practical adaptation measures like stronger, more resilient infrastructure, better zoning and building codes … or in the case of wildfires, better forest management or undergrounding power lines—but through policies like the Inflation Reduction Act, aimed at reducing greenhouse gas emissions.”
Brown said he knows this, because that’s exactly what he did to get his paper “Climate warming increases extreme daily wildfire growth risk in California” published in Nature recently. He is its lead author.
His Sept. 5 piece in The Free Press is headlined “I left out the full truth to get my climate change paper published,” with a subhead: “I just got published in Nature because I stuck to a narrative I knew the editors would like. That’s not the way science should work.”
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.