Climate study gets pulled after charges of plagiarism

Aussie Pythons & Snakes Forum

Help Support Aussie Pythons & Snakes Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Status
Not open for further replies.

Australis

Almost Legendary
Joined
Jun 8, 2006
Messages
5,468
Reaction score
6
Location
Central Coast NSW
Climate study gets pulled after charges of plagiarism

Evidence of plagiarism and complaints about the peer-review process have led a statistics journal to retract a federally funded study that condemned scientific support for global warming.

By Dan Vergano said:
The study, which appeared in 2008 in the journal Computational Statistics and Data Analysis, was headed by statistician Edward Wegman of George Mason University in Fairfax, Va. Its analysis was an outgrowth of a controversial congressional report that Wegman headed in 2006. The "Wegman Report" suggested climate scientists colluded in their studies and questioned whether global warming was real. The report has since become a touchstone among climate change naysayers.

The journal publisher's legal team "has decided to retract the study," said CSDA journal editor Stanley Azen of the University of Southern California, following complaints of plagiarism. A November review by three plagiarism experts of the 2006 congressional report for USA TODAY also concluded that portions contained text from Wikipedia and textbooks. The journal study, co-authored by Wegman student Yasmin Said, detailed part of the congressional report's analysis.

"Neither Dr. Wegman nor Dr. Said has ever engaged in plagiarism," says their attorney, Milton Johns, by e-mail. In a March 16 e-mail to the journal, Wegman blamed a student who "had basically copied and pasted" from others' work into the 2006 congressional report, and said the text was lifted without acknowledgment and used in the journal study. "We would never knowingly publish plagiarized material" wrote Wegman, a former CSDA journal editor.

Plagiarism can result in research sanctions from federal funding authorities, says federal Office of Research Integrity's John Dahlberg. He would not say whether ORI was investigating the researchers.

The congressional report, requested by global warming skeptic Rep. Joe Barton, R-Texas, and the study concluded that climate scientists favorably publish one another's work because of too-close collaboration. They suggested this led to the consensus that the Earth is warming.

A 2009 National Academy of Sciences report found that climate studies show average global temperatures have increased 1.4 degrees in the past century, for example.

The study concluded that top scientists shouldn't collaborate. Instead, studies where a "principal author tends to co-author papers with younger colleagues who were his students" would produce less-biased results. Barton reiterated his support for the report last fall.

Computer scientist Ted Kirkpatrick of Canada's Simon Fraser University, filed a complaint with the journal after reading the climate science website Deep Climate, which first noted plagiarism in the Wegman Report in 2009. "There is something beyond ironic about a study of the conduct of science having ethics problems," Kirkpatrick says.

Azen says the study seemed novel and important at a time when social networking studies were "hot." Johns says his clients "stand by their work" despite the retraction.

George Mason University said in 2010 that it was investigating the charges of plagiarism. University spokesman Dan Walsch says the study retraction was a "personnel matter" and declined to comment.

Climate study gets pulled after charges of plagiarism - USATODAY.com
 
Should be ""Anti Climate change Study gets pulled shouldn't it.
 
It's a study of the climate so the title is adequate. No "good" study is anti anything :p
 
It's a study of the climate so the title is adequate. No "good" study is anti anything :p

That makes no sense whatsoever. The paper was an exercise debunking climate change. It is therefore an anit climate change study.
 
I was being sarcastic. Apparently it didn't translate properly sorry.
However, since you want to argue, the title is "climate study...". Whether it is trying to prove climate change or disprove it, it's all a study of the climate. So technically there doesn't need to be an "anti" in there to adequately describe it. You would be correct if the title was "climate change study..." but it isn't so you're not :p
 
Last edited:
Our best bet is to start building a galaxy crawler..you know, like a gigantic Noah’s Ark…in the 700yrs we’re waiting for the current carbon levels to diminish. At that rate we can load all of our animals onboard and find a clean planet :lol: Heaven forbid if someone can’t come up with a carbon filter that could be used for multiple applications over the next 200 years, since it’s only taken roughly 200yrs to get to the panic we’re in now :lol: When we’ve stopped carbon pollution by corking all the volcanos and starving off all the trees, will we have to inject more carbon into the atmosphere? And, after the fossil fuels are taxed beyond purchase, will we have reducing carbon taxes? OMG! So many variables!! My head is going to explode! :lol:
 
I was being sarcastic. Apparently it didn't translate properly sorry.
However, since you want to argue, the title is "climate study...". Whether it is trying to prove climate change or disprove it, it's all a study of the climate. So technically there doesn't need to be an "anti" in there to adequately describe it. You would be correct if the title was "climate change study..." but it isn't so you're not :p

No its a study of studies about climate change studies seeking to debunk studies about climate change which makes it an anti climate change study.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top