Loading ...A major admission?
Brown stated that scientists hoping to advance their careers by getting published in leading journals are inclined to tailor their findings to align with the biases of editors and reviewers.
He notes that this dynamic “distorts a great deal of climate science research, misinforms the public, and most importantly, makes practical solutions more difficult to achieve.”
“I knew not to try to quantify key aspects other than climate change in my research because it would dilute the story that prestigious journals like Nature and its rival, Science, want to tell,” Brown writes about his study paper.
He asserts that reviewers and “editors of these journals have made it abundantly clear, both by what they publish and what they reject, that they want climate papers that support certain preapproved narratives—even when those narratives come at the expense of broader knowledge for society.”
Saying the quiet part out loud . Good for him. Won’t be hearing from him any more though