I don’t know what to make of it but DeSmog Blog–which seems pretty alarmist–reports that Dr. Klaus-Martin Schulte’s analysis of Global Warming journal articles (which shows that a debate continues) has been rejected by one journal’s editor. The post seems to be getting a lot of attention (including a link of the glorious fark.com) but, judging from the story, I wonder why it’s news at all.
Here’s what happened best as I can tell: One the chief editor of an editor reviewed journal (here are the guidelines) has decided she doesn’t like the paper. Her right. (Although, if this journal works like most, this implies that the relevant section editor did like the paper.)
Maybe it is a bad paper. (I haven’t read it and don’t know enough to evaluate it anyway.) But editor-reviewed journals don’t even pretend to select papers through any objective process: they just try to print an interesting mix of articles that the editors like. And, for whatever reason, the editor didn’t like this paper. So, again, why is this a story at all?