{#11c}LaFramboise- peer review / citations -The Delinquent Author

Oh my, just had a chance to read this tonight, for the first time in many months, and am quite embarrassed by all the typos I found.  What can I say, I was pretty burned out on the project by this point.  I'm no educated writer, journalist or scholar, I'm just a working guy who's been paying attention for a long time and I'm learning the writing as I'm going along.  In a way, I admit it's silly of me even tackling this, someone better skilled than me should be doing it… but, where are they?

I'm simply filling a vacuum so please be tolerant of my rough edges.  
And I invite anyone to copy any of this and do something better with it than I can.
edited 11/25/2013


~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Other event's have overtaken this project.  And we only have so many hours in a day.  So for the time being this will be the last in this series looking at Donna LaFramboise's disingenuous crazy making.

This is the third and final installment on chapter 11 "The Peer Review Fairy Tale" looking at details of Donna's own Fairy Tales. 

From her manipulation of Pachauri quotes to her decidedly misleading presentation of what the IPCC promises, while giving a skewed description of what it produces.

Including a look at Donna's mistaken assumption that only peer reviewed literature is authoritative and that all else deserves an "F."

Chapter eleven of The Delinquent Teenager  "The Peer Review Fairy Tale".  

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

{#11b}LaFramboise The Delinquent Author - Dr. Tol

It's looking like chapter 11 "The Peer Review Fairy Tale" is going to take some dissecting.  This installment was prompted by my researches into Professor Richard Tol the economists who's future-casts and hostility towards the IPCC LaFramboise embraces.  She presents him as a trustworthy, reliable source.  Yet, a closer looker reveals a very different image.

This thread is a side track, but I am going to look at these people Donna chooses to trust over and above the considered opinion of the greater community of experts.

Chapter eleven of The Delinquent Teenager  "The Peer Review Fairy Tale".  

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. }

~ ~ ~

Pearls of Wisdom From Donna Laframboise Pt1: IPCC Authorship

I want to share an interesting video that was released today.

byMothIncarnate

:20  -  Complaint about 20ish graduate students working on the IPCC reports.

:50  -  "people who come from the right country or right gender."

1:20  -  "Professional activists"

             checking some qualifications

3:00  -  On being objective - having bias

3:30  -  Peer review

3:40  -  "Where are the open letters?"

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 

Upon examination turns out the IPCC represents what the current science is saying

{ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y34fr1_qg30 }

.

.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 

{#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?

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.

SUMMARY OF THE 35TH SESSION OF IPCC

{edited 2/21/2013}

Reviewing Donna LaFramboise's book "The Delinquent Teenager" I've had cause to refer IPCC documents quite often and I'm struck with how professional and diligent they are ~ then returning to LaFramboise's juvenile hostility soaked fantasy about the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change is quite disheartening.  That so many take her sort of language and argument seriously is shocking and disheartening.


In any event, I came across this report from a June 2012 IPCC meeting and thought I'd post it over here.  It's a serious document at over ten thousand words and most of it get's the way bureaurcratic /technical stuff gets, not really something I want to sit down and read word for word.

But, the point is - after all of Donna's talk about spoiled brats and her other colorful invectives - this document, shows how adults and experts and professionals talk about and deal with complex issues.  

Reprinted with the permission of the 
International Institute for Sustainable Development 

{I have added highlights to some interesting sections}

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 

http://www.iisd.ca/vol12/enb12547e.html

Volume 12 Number 547 - Tuesday, 12 June 2012

SUMMARY OF THE 35TH SESSION OF 
THE INTERGOVERNMENTAL PANEL ON CLIMATE CHANGE

6-9 June 2012

The 35th session of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) was held from 6-9 June 2012 in Geneva, Switzerland. The session was attended by more than two hundred participants, including representatives from governments, the United Nations, and intergovernmental and observer organizations.

Discussions focused on the work resulting from the consideration of the InterAcademy Council (IAC) Review of the IPCC processes and procedures, namely those on: governance and management; procedures for the IPCC reports; and the communications strategy.  In this respect, the Panel approved functions of the IPCC Secretariat and Technical Support Units (TSUs) and the Communications Strategy. Delegates also agreed to revisions to the Procedures for the Preparation, Review, Acceptance, Adoption, Approval and Publication of IPCC Reports, including on the role of observers in the preparation of assessment reports. These decisions conclude the Panel’s consideration of the recommendations from the IAC Review.

{#4} D.LaFramboise The Delinquent Author - 20-somethings

{edited 2/7/2013}
{edited 11/25/2013}

This is chapter four from Donna LaFramboise's book 

The Delinquent Teenager: "Twenty-Something Graduate Students"

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. }

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

4 - Twenty-Something Graduate Students   
So if malaria experts aren't writing the section on malaria in the Climate Bible and world-renowned sea level experts aren't writing the section on sea levels, 

First we should be clear that Donna misrepresents the circumstances regarding her "malaria expert" Reiter's affiliation with the IPCC.

{#3} D.LaFramboise The Delinquent Author - Best Experts

This is chapter three from Donna LaFramboise's book 
The Delinquent Teenager: "The Top Scientists & Best Experts?"

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. }

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

For starters, I want to point out that Donna LaFramboise refers to IPCC reports as "Climate Bible" four times in this chapter.  Notice how she uses it as a pejorative - her implication being that "it was handed down from on high and is immutable."

Many of her claims can be dispelled simply by spending the time to give the IPCC reports a good-faith reading.

Donna maliciously distorts her readers perception of IPCC expectations and powers.  Instead, Donna contends herself with merely casting aspersions then morphing them into self evident truths.

A fair play approach would have examined how leaders utilize IPCC reports - how much impact IPCC reports have actually had on important decisions and such.  Instead Donna contends herself with making the IPCC sound like a big menace, but never making a case for why we should believe her.

{#2} D. LaFramboise The Delinquent Author - praise worthy?

This is chapter two from Donna LaFramboise's book 
The Delinquent Teenager: "Showered With Praise"
  
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. }

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

2 - Showered With Praise   
The IPCC has lounged, for more than two decades, in a large comfy chair atop a pedestal...{she goes on for another 80 words} 

Look at this wording - it has nothing to do with investigative journalism and everything with melodrama and playing up emotions and prejudices.

{#1}Updated-LaFramboise Delinquent Author - A Closer Look

{revised in light of the first ten chapters 2/20/2013
a small addition 3/4/2013}

I know this character who's been trumpeting the "sharp sighted" investigative journalism of Donna LaFramboise.  I find it irritating because from what I've read and heard in her lectures she is pretty shallow and comes across as an agenda driven propagandist - not any sort of objective journalist.  

Since this character shared a video of Donna lecturing in Germany he was quite proud of... and I was appalled with...  I decided to do a review, but while writing up my comments on that video, I realized it was no good.  This had gone too far and I needed to breakdown and actually purchase LaFramboise's "The Delinquent Teenager." 

This afternoon I read to chapter seven and now I can better understand why serious scientists refuse to acknowledge her or to waste their precious time dealing with her, even after being maliciously slandered by Ms. LaFramboise.  To them, she seems a lost cause and simply not worth their effort.  

Still, it seems to me Donna's been getting too much of a free ride.  It would be good to have a compendium cataloging LaFramboise long string of manipulations, errors, omissions.  

I also want to examine the way she frames her wording; the way her attitude filters her facts; the way she arranges snippets of cherry-picked information; including the way she morphs very questionable assumptions into her self-certain truths.  (2/4/2013)

Excuse me if I slip into a virtual dialogue with Ms. LaFramboise from time to time by asking some questions I wish I could confront her with.  In fact, in revisiting this chapter I've decided to intersperse the following with questions I'd like to ask "Skeptical" Laframboise believing 
right-wing leaning, climate science distrusting persons.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 

Chapter One:  "A Closer Look at the World's Leading Climate Body"

{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. }

I've made it to chapter ten.  And considering the continued conversation at other venues, I decided to revisit this chapter.  New and improved, in light of my learning curve with the first ten chapters.     2/20/2013

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 

Chapter #1 - 

A Closer Look at the World's Leading Climate Body

This book is about a spoiled child. Year after year, this child has been admired, flattered, and praised. There has been no end of self-esteem-building in his life. What there has been little of, though, is honest feedback or constructive criticism. 

~ ~ ~ 

Notice that instead of spending her opening words introducing her topic. . . which would be an investigation of the IPCC process.  Donna is off weaving a let's pretend'n-imagine situation.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 

When we're young, our parents ensure that we confront our mistakes. When our ball shatters a neighbor's window we're required to apologize - and to help pay for a replacement. What happens, though, if a child is insulated from consequences? What if he hears his parents tell the neighbor that because he's special and precious he hasn't done anything that wrong by trampling the neighbor's flower bed? 

~ ~ ~

Notice Donna sculpting her main character while weaving a make-believe situation.  See how she has textured the character.  
You are watching a fiction writer's imaginative process in action.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

The answer is obvious. A child who is never corrected is unlikely to develop self-discipline. A child whom everyone says is brilliant feels no need to strive for excellence. Nor does he have much hope of developing

~ ~ ~

Donna fills in the details and conjures a dilemma.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

The child at the center of this book was brought into the world by two United Nations bodies - one focused on the weather, the other on the environment. Called the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change - IPCC for short - this child arrived more than 20 years ago. 

~ ~ ~

Here Donna bonds her fictitious invention, a Voodoo Doll of the teenager everyone hates, with the IPCC.  

At this point I gotta ask the right-wing leaning audience for whom this book was written: Do you care, at all, about what the IPCC and it's process is actually about?  

Or are you in this just for the wish fulfillment and entertainment value?

Donna goes on. . .
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 

"... Any child with over 100 godparents is bound to be spoiled. Even when he torments small animals there will always be those who think he can do no wrong. Which means that disciplining this child is next to impossible. Having morphed into an obnoxious adolescent, the IPCC is now everyone's problem."

~ ~ ~

Notice how Donna ratchets up our distain for her Voodoo Doll?  Then with a few swift key strokes Donna again bonds her Voodoo Doll with the IPCC - all without presenting one bit of actual information about the IPCC process.  

Didn't she promise us an investigation?!

How's that work?  

Dear LaFramboise fan: Has the notion of fair-play totally disappeared from the right-wing leaning world?
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 

"... These reports are informally known as the Climate Bible..."  

~ ~ ~ 

Can we get serious for a moment?  
The only time I hear that term "Climate Bible" being used, it's an insult.  Donna takes poetic advantage of it, repeating it over a hundred times.

Everyone who deals with IPCC reports knows they are reports regarding the current state of the science, learned people know these reports are a "best-effort" and they know that they will be superseded with new information.  

That is NOT a "Bible"... and to get obsessive about repeating that "Climate Bible" mantra indicates that we have propaganda, not science or learning, going on here.  

You know: 'repeat something often enough and everyone starts to believe it, even if it's nonsense.' 

And Donna sure loves repeating this juvenile taunt as though repeating her mantra over a hundred times will make it true.  

Does any of that have to do with investigative journalism?
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 
{Here's a funny irony for someone who panders to audience with comments such as:}

What most of us don't know is that, rather than being written by a meticulous, upstanding professional in business attire, this report was produced by a slapdash, slovenly teenager who has trouble distinguishing right from wrong.  

~ ~ ~ 

This is who she gets her expert economics advice from, the controversial and much criticized by his peers

 

Dr. Richard Tol 

I don't bring this up to disparage Dr. Tol's looks, there seems to be plenty enough about his work to disparage.  I simply want to point out LaFramboise's dishonest melodramatic tactics, her only purpose can be to emotionalize and prejudice her audience - it definitely has nothing to do with teaching or learning about what's happening with our climate.
~ ~ ~ 

As I have shown in later chapters, those 20-somethings Donna derides have been the backbone of scientific progress for centuries.  For her to spin this sub-plot reveals a certain ruthless disregard for the truth.

~ ~ ~ 

Beyond that, reading LaFramboise's words. . .  there was a tad too much emotional investment when attacking young scientists.  I got the feeling there were issues other than science gnawing at LaFramboise.  

Which is what we really should be concerned with here.

{Incidentally Donna, when have your "professional" types "in business attire" ever achieved any serious 'boots on the ground' Earth observations/science?}  

Seems like one of those politically emotional appeals to all those right-wing leaning types who want to believe they can discount anyone with scruffy hair. 

Is it that easy to buy folks off?

Another example of propaganda rather than investigation.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 

. . . Yet even though the IPCC is one of the world's most influential bodies, and even though it evaluates matters in which trillions of dollars are at stake, well into the 21st century it saw no need to even discuss conflict-of-interest. This organization is so arrogant, so used to being fawned over, that its leaders failed to take the most ordinary of precautions.

~ ~ ~ 

Sounds near hysterical!

NO. The IPCC promises to present the best effort state of the science to politicians and business leaders - all of whom have their own agendas and brains who will do with the reports what they will.  Most the time it's turned out to be absolutely nothing!  I mean, easy on the hysterical exaggeration please.

Come on Donna, how about some examples of these trillion dollar decisions hanging on the IPCC's word?

Beyond that, the science reported by the IPCC is echoed throughout the scientific community.  

Yea, yea, Donna can point to her outliers... what does it add up to?  Maybe <5% learned folks who claim to be neo-Galilieo's unveiling a massive scientific hoax? Interestingly, some folks believe these outliers are supposed to outweigh the accumulated "established" global scientific network?  Why?

I realize Donna's indignation convinces many but please notice how all this time - all she has done is lathered her audience into a hostile attitude towards what? . . .  some imaginary character she has artfully manifested?  

What about the real IPCC organization and the real human working a complicated process, when do they get their fair hearing?

Isn't that rather bizarre?  Don't right-wing leaning folks believe in fair play anymore?

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~