If you are interested, click the free subscription bar image above to start the subscription process. Further along, it gets interesting. I thought this page querying what online climate news sources you read was pretty telling:
I note RealClimate, Climate Progress, Stoat (William Connolley of Wiki fame), and even the paid Hoggan public relations firm “DeSmog Blog” are listed.
I reckon that skeptical sites like WUWT don’t rate with Nature, even though we have more traffic and reach than those blogs. I suppose that speaks to the tone of this new journal before it is even published.
(Note: Stoat http://scienceblogs.com/stoat/ won’t plot, it only shows scienceblogs.com as a conglomerate rating)
But if you sign up for a free subscription, you can always put wattsupwiththat.com in the Other (please specify) box.
I’m sure the volume will surprise them.
When you are all done, you are treated to a page (below) where they tell you they’ll get back to you if you are deemed “worthy”. Well, they didn’t say exactly that, but it was implied.
I answered all questions carefully and applied for a subscription, it will be interesting to see if they give me one.
Here’s what they say about the new journal Nature Climate Change in the “About the Journal” section of the website:
Understanding the Earth’s changing climate, and its consequences, is a scientific challenge of enormous importance to society. Nature Climate Change is a monthly journal dedicated to publishing the most significant and cutting-edge research on the impacts of global climate change and its implications for the economy, policy and the world at large.
Nature Climate Change publishes original research across the physical and social sciences and strives to synthesize interdisciplinary research. The journal follows the standards for high-quality science set by all Nature-branded journals and is committed to publishing top-tier original research in all areas relating to climate change through a fair and rigorous review process, access to a broad readership, high standards of copy editing and production, rapid publication and independence from academic societies and others with vested interests.
In addition to publishing original research, Nature Climate Change provides a forum for discussion among leading experts through the publication of opinion, analysis and review articles. It also highlights the most important developments in the field through Research Highlights and publishes original reporting from renowned science journalists in the form of feature articles.
Topics covered in the journal include:
- Adaptation
- Anthropology
- Atmospheric science
- Biochemistry
- Communication
- Cryospheric science
- Ecology
- Economics
- Energy
- Ethics
- Geography
- Health
- Hydrology
- Impacts and vulnerability
- Mitigation
- Modelling
- Oceanography
- Palaeoclimate*
- Policy and governance
- Philosophy
- Psychology
- Sociology
- Sustainability and development
*Nature Climate Change will publish cutting-edge research on the science of contemporary climate change, its impacts, and the wider implications for the economy, society and policy. Thus, while we certainly appreciate the importance of palaeoclimate research in its own right, we can only consider for publication palaeoclimate studies that shed significant new light on the nature, underlying causes or impacts of current climate change.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Thanks for the invitation, but no %$£&*+) thanks! It looks too “expert” for me! I prefer a broader based blog, grovel, grovel;-)) I guess it goes to show just how much money there really is in the AGW Industry when they can afford to do this kind of thing.
Now that puts me in a quandary. I would like to put down WUWT as a source of news information but wonder whether that would impact on my chances of getting accepted.
Isn’t it unusal for subscribers to a journal to have to be vetted and accepted?
It apperars they have decided to put all the junk climate science in a new journal so they can restore the tarnished reputation of their main journal, Science.
I will pass up this “free” offer.Nothing’s free and I don’t want my name on their subscription list.
I remember entering my name to win a free gift at the state fair a few times. Only I never won first prize always second which meant I would have to cough up more money to get it than if I went and bought it at suggested retail price at a store.
Free as in free used cat litterbox filler!
No Thanks!
They only allow 11 chars for ‘other’ blogs, so I put in “WUWT”
I’ve applied, but they won’t be impressed with my answers!
everyone, please signup and put wattsupwiththat.com in the “other” box. Perhaps we can FOI later to reveal how many people did that!
REPLY: I assume you are joking, FOI only applies to government agencies – Anthony
“Understanding the Earth’s changing climate”
1) What exactly is the Earth’s climate?
2) What is it changing to?
I clicked on the ‘I do not box’ and would not let me go to the next page to look at what was in it…pity, I just wanted to fill the rest in and send back to them showing how biased their selection of reading is…oh well, I know where I can find the truth, just avoid all their listed news sources…
“Thus, while we certainly appreciate the importance of palaeoclimate research in its own right, we can only consider for publication palaeoclimate studies that shed significant new light on the nature, underlying causes or impacts of current climate change.”
So they only want to hear the views that confirm their own prejudices. So fair-minded!
I too, like Alan the Brit, shied away from the free offer, for three reasons.
1/ I was offended that it listed the Guardian Environment blog in the science category when it actually fits in the ‘usually advocacy, sometimes science’ category.
2/ Any publication that deliberately avoids placing WUWT in the science category is showing its true colours.
3/ Time is too precious to waste time sorting metaphorical wheat from chaff and I am suficiently biased against the publishers to believe that they have turned over a new leaf.
Thanks but no thanks.
Since they asked questions about budget and purchasing authority, I assume it will be paid for from advertising. That is the natural progression of progressive industries like electronics and computers which have been ad-supported for decades. Climate science is just a little behind, but as it turns into big business, it makes more sense.
You get what you pay for.
The phrase-
“wattsupwiththat.com”
is too long to fit into any of the “Other” blocks.
[Reply: They will certainly know who “WUWT” is. ~dbs, mod.]
I prefer the soft TP that comes in rolls.
Sorry, I just can’t do it! Really! Their reputation precedes them. No integrity at Nature. I also think the monetary price says a great deal about the actual value of their product.
Remember Nature has already ‘ensured’ the editorial values of this by putting one of Mann’s co authors and fellow Penn State worker in charge of editorial control within the ‘earth sciences’ side. It therefore hardly surprises what is not on the list and what is.
y’all are missing the point: go back and sign up, tell them what they want to hear, ask for a printed version and when you get it, toss it in the recycle waste….
if enough people do that, they’ll go broke.
I created a new email address specially for them!
You see how they are starting to change the null hypothesis? Compare the title “Nature Climate Change” with some of Nature’s other publications: Nature Neuroscience, Nature Biotechnology, Nature Methods, Nature Clinical Practice , Nature Structural & Molecular Biology, Nature Chemistry, Nature Photonics, Nature Geoscience, …
Now why didn’t they call the new publication, “Nature Climate” rather than “Nature Climate Change”?
Darn
“Unfortunately, you do not qualify for a free subscription to Nature Climate Change. However, we would like to offer you the opportunity to purchase a subscription.
A limited number of free subscriptions are available in North America and Europe and are subject to the publisher’s acceptance.”
Us Aussies aren’t important it seems , even though we have been on the receiving of all their AGW caused “climate”
I’m SOOOO upset…../sarc
Pay for a subscription.. surely they jest !! 🙂
P Gosselin says:
February 3, 2011 at 3:02 am
I prefer the soft TP that comes in rolls.
In my university days, the wags used to graffiti beside the roll, “arts degrees – please take one”. Perhaps now we could replace “arts” with “climate “science””.
So the entire premise of the journal is to accept climate change as real and talk about the consequences if it is real – pretty amazingly poor science.