This is going to be useful: The CMIP Rapid Evaluation Framework (REF) for derived data from the CMIP archives: dashboard.climate-ref.org Still working out the kinks and focused on CMIP6, but will expand for CMIP7. #CMIP2026

Perhaps the Committee on Publication Ethics might include in its guidelines: When an article is retracted, publishers should notify authors of all papers which have cited it.

Ahmad Sofi-Mahmudi@choxos.bsky.social · 6mo ago

Whereas retractions usually expose scandals in science, citations to retracted articles are a bigger scandal, especially when they are post-retraction. XeraRetractions web app: openscience.xera.ac/retractions

We might ask similar questions about training, orders, guidelines, discipline and whistleblowing at ICE.

Has anyone publicised incentive structures in ICE - such as quotas, targets and bonuses? Is there scope for these systems to be challenged in court?

Olivia Messer@oliviamesser.bsky.social · 9mo ago

79-year-old Paul Bojerski was born to Polish parents in a WWII German refugee camp. His family legally emigrated to the U.S. when he was 5. He’s been taken by ICE in Florida. www.orlandosentinel.com/2025/11/16/s...

RR: Rigorous Review. RPR: Rigorous Part-Review. Competent, useful critical appraisal does not necessarily need a "peer" as regards ability to assess more than one aspect of a research article - or to cover more than one aspect. PRR: Positive Rigorous Review. PR2: Positive Rigorous Part-Review.

Could a US legal expert provide information/views on this, or give context - What are the duties of members of the US armed forces if ordered to: a) consider, b) plan, c) prepare for, d) facilitate, or e) give purported justification for action which would be unlawful if carried out?

Could a US legal expert provide information/views on this, or give context - What are the duties of members of the US armed forces if ordered to: a) consider, b) plan, c) prepare for, d) facilitate, or e) give purported justification for action which would be unlawful if carried out?

RR: Rigorous Review. RPR: Rigorous Part-Review. Competent, useful critical appraisal does not necessarily need a "peer" as regards ability to assess more than one aspect of a research article - or to cover more than one aspect. PRR: Positive Rigorous Review. PR2: Positive Rigorous Part-Review.

Degenerative "AI".

Also: the more that statistics on serious attacks are dominated by those who know each other, the less relevance to most people's safety.

It's perhaps worth noting that even when we don't know where we may be wrong, we may still be able to think about how to guess at sources of uncertainty - such as by thinking about - how we've been biased in the past, - what mistakes others have made, - how we have defined key concepts and ...

Let's think of other ways to conceptualise this. "Unlimited irresponsibility" "Unlimited damage potential" "Unlimited recklessness" "Limited liability" concerns the welfare of the offender, rather than others.

Let's take a little time to consider what Trump and his allies may be doing behind the scenes, in the form for instance of instructions to agencies on surveillance.

If your government has a realistic plan in case of a sudden and massive disruption to fossil fuel supply (through war or otherwise): It can probably use a lot of that plan now for the climate crisis. If it doesn't have that plan: It's probably failing on both counts.

SINO: Science In Name Only.

Matt Berkley@mattberkley.bsky.social · 8mo ago

The fact that a journal claims an article is "peer-reviewed" is not good enough evidence for you, the reader or citer, to give an impression that there was meaningful review or that the article is trustworthy. That would be poor research, unscientific, if there is little or no supporting evidence.

Yes, it's important for people to understand climate effects of outsourcing to other countries (including both emissions and lost forests). Also material footprint (end of article) www.escoe.ac.uk/the-uks-hidd... and pollution/habitat destruction effects of outsourced manufacturing/farming.

The UK’s hidden carbon footprint - ESCoE

Accounting for environmental impacts in trade By Anne Owen, Lena Killian and Rutger Hoekstra When […]

escoe.ac.uk

"Adding up some domestic emissions that your largely service economy causes and going on about "net zero" without telling people each time what you are talking about is a bit like paying your poorer neighbour to burn your rubbish and implying you haven't caused any smoke." Is that fair?

Matt Berkley@mattberkley.bsky.social · 9mo ago

Let's reject the UK Government's misleading frame "Net Zero" and call it "Territorial* Net Zero". The fact that countries report TNZ to the UN doesn't mean the UK has to focus on what may (soon?) be only half its contributions to greenhouse gases, misleading on progress. * or similar. Domestic?

Climate impacts of a country on others, in addition to domestic emissions, include impacts caused or partially caused outside its borders, through for example: Outsourced emissions Shipping, aviation Subsidiaries Financing pollution Failure of companies/governments to warn of dangers Military

Shall we call traditional peer review (for example, secret, only involving a couple of reviewers who may not between them have all the required skills, knowledge and experience, and unpaid) initial peer review: IPR?

Shall we say "published article" (or "draft" if the authors prefer) instead of "preprint" if it's published on the internet, and "traditionally published" or "published with a claim of initial peer review" if it's traditionally "published"?

Matt Berkley@mattberkley.bsky.social · 7mo ago

Shall we call traditional peer review (for example, secret, only involving a couple of reviewers who may not between them have all the required skills, knowledge and experience, and unpaid) initial peer review: IPR?

If people expert in research methods publicise lists of research they have assessed as adequate and at least potentially significant, that might help focus attention on deserving work, and less on work that's very-difficult-to-assess-regardless-of-expertise. bsky.app/profile/matt...

Matt Berkley@mattberkley.bsky.social · 9mo ago

In a field where evidence suggests that a high proportion of papers have serious flaws, a database of "potentially important" papers which appear *not* to have serious flaws might be useful, as well as identifying those that do.

Some astronomy words Showsun/Sunshow/Revealsun/Sunreveal/Seesun/Sunsee/Uncoversun/Sununcover/HRS (Horizon Reveals Sun) Hidesun/Suncover/Coversun/HHS (Horizon Hides Sun) Showmoon/Hidemoon/Mooncover etc.

Moonpass The Moon always overtakes Earth on the outside. This is usually a Full Moon; sometimes a Shademoon/Part Shademoon (lunar eclipse). Passmoon Earth always overtakes the Moon on the outside. A New Moon; sometimes a total/partial Moonsun/Sunmoon/Sunblock (solar eclipse).

Is the bigger threat "AI" or "IA", InAttention?

"If there are two steps in my argument and each has 70% probability then I am probably wrong. 70/100 x 70/100 = 4900/10000 = 49%." web.archive.org/web/20081121...

"If there are two steps in my argument and each has 70% probability then I am probably wrong. 70/100 x 70/100 = 4900/10000 = 49%." web.archive.org/web/20081121...

Shall we say "published article" (or "draft" if the authors prefer) instead of "preprint" if it's published on the internet, and "traditionally published" or "published with a claim of initial peer review" if it's traditionally "published"?

Matt Berkley@mattberkley.bsky.social · 7mo ago

Shall we call traditional peer review (for example, secret, only involving a couple of reviewers who may not between them have all the required skills, knowledge and experience, and unpaid) initial peer review: IPR?

These "central estimates" for global average temperature are out of line with any normal or sane approach to risk. Think of the % chances you're happy to take action, or pay, to avoid as regards plane travel, crime, health, insurance and so on.

Matt Berkley@mattberkley.bsky.social · 8mo ago

Climate projections' "central estimates" are a bit like a weather forecaster saying, "Our central estimate is strong wind" rather than "We think there is a serious risk of a catastrophic storm". And climate models' ability to cope with the complexity of, for example, clouds is uncertain.

And it's not just the average global temperature rise that's important - it's, for example: higher rises in some places, and temperature differences between places causing weather disruption, and these, and the speed of change, disrupt ecological systems.

Dr. Genevieve Guenther (she/they)@doctorvive.bsky.social · 9mo ago

“3C global warming sounds small, but it’s about half the difference between the middle of the last ice age and today”

Politician: Voters won't let me do what I think is right/science says on animal welfare/climate/environment/refugees. Journalist can ask: Are you not experienced in persuasion? Are you not paid to be a leader? Are you giving voters the relevant facts?