Comments on: Will ‘Climategate’ lead to Open Access review as an alternative to Peer Review? http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/will-climategate-lead-to-open-access-review-as-an-alternative-to-peer-review/ Serving The Intelligent Design Community Mon, 13 Feb 2012 20:43:49 +0000 hourly 1 By: CannuckianYankee http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/will-climategate-lead-to-open-access-review-as-an-alternative-to-peer-review/comment-page-1/#comment-347360 CannuckianYankee Tue, 09 Feb 2010 23:58:56 +0000 http://www.uncommondescent.com/?p=11549#comment-347360 Frost, Agreed - we demand transparency from groups that receive Government funding in this country. Why should we make an exception when such groups are outside of this country, yet are contributing information that may affect our taxation? Global warming may be Obama's Iraq. Obama needs to stand up and demand such transparency before making any commitment to fighting climate change. If he wants to avoid a Bush-Iraq scenario (going in without evidence), he'd be wise to reconsider his stance. I noticed that he went out of his way not to have another Katrina with his response to the Haiti situation. Frost,

Agreed – we demand transparency from groups that receive Government funding in this country. Why should we make an exception when such groups are outside of this country, yet are contributing information that may affect our taxation?

Global warming may be Obama’s Iraq.

Obama needs to stand up and demand such transparency before making any commitment to fighting climate change. If he wants to avoid a Bush-Iraq scenario (going in without evidence), he’d be wise to reconsider his stance. I noticed that he went out of his way not to have another Katrina with his response to the Haiti situation.

]]> By: Frost122585 http://www.uncommondescent.com/intelligent-design/will-climategate-lead-to-open-access-review-as-an-alternative-to-peer-review/comment-page-1/#comment-347356 Frost122585 Tue, 09 Feb 2010 22:15:33 +0000 http://www.uncommondescent.com/?p=11549#comment-347356 The deal here is obvious, of common sense and very simple- not to mention totally supported by ANY scientific standards- and that is whatever data- models or organizations any governmental panel or committee wants to site or apeal to in regards to climate change or currently nonexistent global warming- MUST be transparent. That is the models and data must be totally reviewable by out side sources. This is the only way a real democratically compatible reaction can take place. It is totally nonsensical and corrupt to allow any organization to keep their data and models private on matters that would directly effect the populace concerning issues if environmental concerns based on interpretations and projections. This is a NO DUH situation. Either let the outside review and critique your science or shut up. The deal here is obvious, of common sense and very simple- not to mention totally supported by ANY scientific standards- and that is whatever data- models or organizations any governmental panel or committee wants to site or apeal to in regards to climate change or currently nonexistent global warming- MUST be transparent. That is the models and data must be totally reviewable by out side sources. This is the only way a real democratically compatible reaction can take place.

It is totally nonsensical and corrupt to allow any organization to keep their data and models private on matters that would directly effect the populace concerning issues if environmental concerns based on interpretations and projections.

This is a NO DUH situation. Either let the outside review and critique your science or shut up.

]]>