ECSNorway Wrote:This is part of the problem that people are running into trying to get research counter to the "consensus" published.But, its not. I can point you to the paper, published six years ago that disputed Mann's claims and you won't find one e-mail talking about that paper needed to be surpressed in the e-mails.. If you were right then the work of Christiansen, Shaviv and Svensmark and others would have been deliberatly blocked. But they weren't. In fact, they are hardly even mentioned in the so called conspiracy e-mails.
Their peers won't review it.
That is in fact what the original post in this thread was all about. Research contradicting the "the sky is falling" viewpoint is being actively suppressed.
The closests thing to a conspiracy is a few e-mails talking about boycotting the Journal of Climate Research after that journal published a paper which contained blatent misrepresentations of their data sets, and then only after the Journal of Climate Research refused to publish a paper by an editor of ther Journal of Climate Research which would have firmly rebutted the paper published and which had more than half the editorial board of the Journal of Climate Research resigning in response.
---------------
Epsilon