Academic peer groups have always judged their own. And over the years it has

been pretty effective too because of extreme rivalry and jealousy among

them.

----- Original Message -----

From: "Ed Leafe" <ed@leafe.com>

To: "ProFox Email List" <profox@leafe.com>

Sent: Wednesday, August 24, 2011 12:43 PM

Subject: Re: [OT] Climate-change scientists cleared of misconduct

On Aug 24, 2011, at 11:00 AM, Ricardo Aráoz wrote:

>> His peers from the university he works at adjudged him not guilty in 3 of

>> 4

>> areas. Yup, I've been put at ease.

>

> In science you are always judged by your peers.

That's what makes it a conspiracy! ;-)

For the record, I didn't post this to sway the deniers; I'm convinced that

they will cling to anything, real or imaginary, rather than open their

minds. They start with their opinion, and then pick and choose those things

that support that opinion, and twist or ignore those that don't.

My only purpose in posting that is for the people who actually are able to

weigh different bits of information and form an opinion. Since the review

was about academic propriety, of course the people to judge that would be

the people who set and enforce those standards.

-- Ed Leafe

[excessive quoting removed by server]

_______________________________________________

Post Messages to: ProFox@leafe.com

Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox

OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech

Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox

This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/3B7F48178BC44898AC22D3BBDF291BCF@dual

** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.