|
looked into it a little more - turns out Latif hasn't published anything on this theory yet, which in the science community means he's not very sure of this theory, AND it means no other climate scientists can legitimately comment on his theory without breaking peer review ethics and protocol.
in science culture, a theory that hasn't been published, based on measurements that haven't been released, can't be discussed officially in the peer-reviewed science journals.
this is related to the one science ethics offense that was decided against the stolen climategate emails - in their private discussions they were sharing measurements taken by a scientist outside their circle, who hadn't given permission for his measurements to be passed around.
by the ethical standards of the science community, that's a violation of the original measuring scientist's right to keep his measurements until he has published. it's kinda like the intellectual property rules of science culture.
I have also read that was one of the reasons, good or bad, that they passively resisted giving up their data to the FOI requests - if it was released, it would destroy the data's usability for publication in the science journals. because science journals dont want to publish data that isn't exclusive, and they will turn down articles that use non-exclusive data, supposedly.
this is one of the aspects of science culture that needs to be talked about. the data needs to be more transparent, and available faster.
anyway, thats why nobody (but the deniers) talks about Latif these days - he hasn't published this theory anywhere in the science journals, so they aren't "allowed" to talk about this theory, until he does publish.
|