Raising WUWT's Crank Magnet Ceiling has created a safe space for publishing the unpublishable:
Propagation of Error and the Reliability of Global Air Temperature Projections
Guest essay by Pat Frank
...The bottom line is that when it comes to a CO2 effect on global climate, no one knows what they’re talking about...
I recently received my sixth rejection; this time from Earth and Space Science, an AGU journal. The rejection followed the usual two rounds of uniformly negative but scientifically meritless reviews .
After six tries over more than four years, I now despair of ever publishing the article in a climate journal. The stakes are just too great. It’s not the trillions of dollars that would be lost to sustainability troughers.
Nope. It’s that if the analysis were published, the career of every single climate modeler would go down the tubes, starting with James Hansen. Their competence comes into question. Grants disappear. Universities lose enormous income.
Given all that conflict of interest, what consensus climate scientist could possibly provide a dispassionate review? They will feel justifiably threatened. Why wouldn’t they look for some reason, any reason, to reject the paper?
This has not gone unnoticed:
Watt about breaking the ‘pal review’ glass ceiling
Pat Frank has a guest post on WUWT about breaking the ‘pal review’ glass ceiling in climate modeling.
It’s essentially about a paper of his that he has been trying to get published and that has now been rejected 6 times. As you can imagine, this means that there is some kind of massive conspiracy preventing him from publishing his ground breaking work that would fundamentally damage the underpinnings of climate modelling.
