Nature magazine’s credibility takes yet another hit

Nature magazine blew it again, and unfortunately, these days that’s no news at all.  It’s just more shonky science from the AGW crowd … and people claim the reason the public doesn’t trust climate scientists is a “communications problem”? It’s not. It’s a garbage science problem, and all the communications theory in the world won’t fix garbage science.

Once again the science journal Nature has got its tits in the wringer.  Willis Eschenbach says he took a lot of flak last year for his post saying that the global 50% drop in phytoplankton claimed by Boyce et. al in Nature was an illusion. Eschenbach had no data to back up his claim, just personal observation and some common sense. His post today on Watts Up With That? has vindicated his faith in observation over peer-reviewed science.

Keeping his feet firmly on the ground Eschenbach goes on to say at the end of his piece:

The moral of this story? Well, the moral for me is that trusting my experience over the “science” of high-powered scientists living in an ivory tower far above the ocean worked out well … this time.

But the real moral is that scientists need to pay more attention to the “laugh test”. I know when I first heard the Boyce claim, I busted out laughing … and when our experience is that strong in saying that science is wrong, it’s likely worth checking out.

Exactly.