Dear Mr. Lewis,He has kindly accepted my apology.
I'd like to apologize to you for a comment I made after you critiqued Resplandy et al. I wrote a blog post on Nov 15th titled "Nic Lewis Owes Resplandy et al an Apology." I thought you were quick to criticize them for a lack of a quick response, and somewhat still do, but that now seems minor in light of their retraction. I regret my blog post and extend an apology to you.
With your permission I'll post this email to on my blog, and also point to it right under the title of my Nov 15th post, so Google searches see it.
Sincerely,
David
Wednesday, November 06, 2019
My Apology to Nic Lewis
Today I sent the following email to Nicolas (Nic) Lewis. I'm posting it here with his permission. Also, I've amended my Nov 15th post of last year to note this apology.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
1. Leaving aside the "how fast to criticize" issue, I do think it's a little concerning that Nick found a fundamental flaw so fast, just looking at the paper. And without even access to the detailed code. Why did the researchers and reviewers miss it?
2. Also interesting how the lead author (also listed as corresponding author) didn't address the issues but instead one of the others did. And not the one who messed up the actual calcs/logic. He says he takes responsibility for not catching the others in the mistake...but he's not the one who made the mistake. Leaving aside global warming versus deniers entirely, there has to be some kind of story about collaboration here. Interesting how the group effectively changed the corresponding author.
People should be suspicious anytime they see a headline like "Study finds global warming much worse/better than previously thought"
If a study is contrary to mountains of previous research, it's probably wrong.
Post a Comment