Board to be formed to review IPCC

During an international meeting of environment ministers in Bali, a spokesman for the United Nations Environment Program announced that an independent board of scientists would be appointed to review the workings of the IPCC.

An issue was whether "gray literature," a term to describe non-peer-reviewed science, should be relied upon by the IPCC.
This in turn is related to what is now termed GlacierGate, wherein an assertion by the IPCC about the loss of Himalayan glaciers by the year 2035 was found to have no firm basis in the scientific literature.

HOWEVER, with the retraction of the ocean level paper from the peer-reviewed Nature Geosciences, one sees that the problem is MORE than one of non-peer-reviewed literature. The work of Jan Hendrik Schon and Hwang Woo Suk was peer reviewed and fraudulent.

Further, given that law review articles from law schools are generally NOT peer reviewed, should we label such literature as gray literature? As to the Stanford Law Review, no, Gary Boone did not invent the integrated circuit.

On ClimateGate:


"Rising sea level" paper retracted from Nature Geoscience


APS seeks member input on "clarity and tone" in view of ClimateGate