More fallout from Spencer and Braswell

More interesting reading this morning on this disgraceful episode:

Josh nails it


  1. There is nothing intrinsically wrong with the Spencer and Braswell paper, which was published in the Wolfgang Wagner edited journal called Remote Sensing. Indeed, even Roy W. Spencer, Ph. D. said, “My conclusion is that it is still one damn fine and convincing paper. The evidence verges on being indisputable.”

    As a scientific paper, the arguments contained therein have yet to be disproven through peer review, save for one “major revision”, one “minor revision” and one “accept as is”, which is not uncommon for a scientific paper, even by IPCC standards.

    The problem arises subsequently when Wagner apologizes and resigns, but not for reasons flawed science contained in the Spencer and Braswell paper, as originally reported, but for reasons of editorial impropriety. It appears now that Wagner has connections with the Spencer and Braswell’s papers biggest critic, Kevin Trenberth, lead author of the 2001 and 2007 IPCC Scientific Assessment of Climate Change and of ‘Climategate’ fame.

    It has now become apparent that Wagner is the director of a group that wants to start a Soil Moisture Network and they have asked the help of the Global Energy and Water Cycle Experiment, of which Kevin Trenberth, is its Chairperson, as mentioned in this article from WUWT.

    It now seems very clear that the ‘pal-review’ brigade are no longer concerned with the science, but protecting their own nest eggs from too much scrutiny.

%d bloggers like this: