Sacred peer-review takes a big hit

When only a third of peer-reviewed studies reach the same results when they are replicated by outside authors, this is a serious problem.

By |2018-07-08T08:06:57+00:00July 10th, 2018|Climate|Comments Off on Sacred peer-review takes a big hit

Peer-reviewed journal publishes hoax attributing climate change to penises

“‘The Conceptual Penis as a Social Construct’ should not have been published on its merits because it was actively written to avoid having any merits whatsoever,” the authors concluded. “The paper is academically worthless nonsense. The question that now needs to be answered is, ‘How can we restore the reliability of the peer-review process?’

By |2017-05-20T11:27:38+00:00May 20th, 2017|Climate|17 Comments

EPA ruled by cherry-picking junk science

Mounting evidence that the EPA falsifies and misconstrues evidence and ignores contrary scientific studies in order to justify its outrageous, harmful regulations. CFACT analyst Larry Bell says the time has come to regelate the EPA to the boneyard and return environmental decision making to state regulators.

By |2015-07-07T15:00:59+00:00July 7th, 2015|CFACT Insights|1 Comment