{#11a} D. LaFramboise The Delinquent Author - Peer Review

This post will focus on the first sentence in LaFramboise's chapter eleven of The Delinquent Teenager.  Here I want to take a moment to consider Donna's driving meme - namely, that if a "citation" is not "peer reviewed" it should be discarded.   Donna even goes so far as to imply that the amount of "non-peer reviewed" citations indicates deception.

I will review the rest of her chapter "The Peer Review Fairy Tale" in another post.

For an introduction explaining why I'm reviewing this piece of work, please click here.

{Courier font identifies LaFramboise's words
Laframboise, (2011-10-09). T D T W W M W T C E (Kindle Locations 195-201). 
Ivy Avenue Press. Kindle Edition. }

#11 - The Peer Review Fairy Tale 

“Having repeatedly encountered the claim that IPCC reports rely solely on peer-reviewed literature,”

~ ~ ~
Let’s look at this premise Donna keeps pounding on.

An Audit of LaFramboise's IPCC Citation Audit.

[updated 3/5/2013 pm]

I think I finally cracked LaFramboise's Fallacy.  

She projects that "scientific literature" is supposedly the same as "peer reviewed literature" something that is decidedly false! 

Working Group 3, Chapter 1 of the 2007 IPCC report    

IPPC references =                         14..................28%

Government Study/Report =        14..................28%

Authoritative Sources =                10..................20%

Peer-reviewed (LaFramboise) = 12..................24%  

Quite the political theater Donna, the single-minded procecutor, has pulled off here.  

Besides ignoring the realities of centuries worth of scientific process actually work; she then substitutes her expectation of some utter perfection or the right to scream frauds.

Now she thinks she can scream 'false-advertising' and fraud because authoritative Government and ENG studies, are included on the citation list for the IPCC chapters, or that some citations are reference back to other IPCC sections.

As if pure numbers makes a report. 

When Pachauri and other officials say IPCC bases all their findings on peer reviewed literature.

That does not mean that every single item cited in the final IPCC reports is going to be out of a peer-reviewed journal.  

Think about it.  Citations are a list of everything included in the discussion!  That does not mean the paper wasn't based on a core of peer-reviewed literature.  Get it?

Why Climate Science Deniers Have No Credibility - In One Pie Chart

Here is another way to look at this.
Below are the results of "non" IPCC survey by 
James Lawrence Powell of scientific peer-reviewed literature between January 1991 to November 9th,  2012 using the keyword phrases "Global Warming" or "global climate change" 13,950 article in total.  It's rather dramatic... take a look

New Anthropocene: "donna laframboise and cloud screaming"

Then there is this essay also written in 2010.  It's from a Environmental Studies Student (atmospheric chemistry and ecology) who has a nice website.  "New Anthropocene"  and whereas I'm feeling more'n more like the old codger reminiscing as much as looking forward ~ "Moth" is young and has a very refreshing attitude:

"IT'S SILLY TO PLAY VICTIM WHEN WE ARE THE INSTIGATORS OF CHANGE."

I recommend his (& pals) website             http://newanthropocene.wordpress.com to all who are ready to roll up their sleeves and start doing something about this mess we've collectively allowed ourselves to get sucked into.  

Let me, let him, speak for himself, before turning it over to his appraisal of Donna LaFramboise:

PBL Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency investigates IPCC

Considering the way Donna LaFramboise's goes after the IPCC and it's peer review process in her "Delinquent" chapter 11.  I thought this might be a good place to introduce some objective evidence that Donna will be ignoring.  

Contrary to Donna's hostile fantasies and Pachauri's effusive PR language, no informed adult seriously claims the IPCC is a "Bible" nor that it's perfect.  
It is a human endeavor, subject to the same failing that all great endeavors have been susceptible to.  But, like other great human endeavors a few mistakes don't detract from a solid foundation and steady progress.

Here is a press release from 2010 by the Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency, who did an in depth study of the IPCC literature review process.  

I found their language much more convincing than Donna's melodrama.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 

{I have added the bold and underline highlights}

PBL Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency

Press release | 04-07-2010

Key findings of IPCC on regional climate-change impacts overall considered well founded

PBL Netherlands Environmental Assessment Agency found no errors that would undermine the main conclusions in the 2007 report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) on possible future regional impacts of climate change. The IPCC report conclusively shows that these effects already are visible in many places around the world, and that these will become more serious under further temperature increases. However, the foundation for some of these conclusions could have been made more transparent.