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.
Oslo says:
“It is a buffer against critical/skeptical research in paleo.”
SCIENCE AS THEATRE
I agree, Oslo.
Take stock of the present situation: Wikipedia can only quote published, refereed papers: presto they will be pal-reviewed and published in an ‘off-Broadway’ magazine with a guaranteed (free) readership. They will or course quote each others’ papers.
It gets the Team’s climate nonsense off the pages of Broadway publications.
The Team will tout the relationship with Nature/Science as proof of its ‘reputability’. Publication will be fast, guaranteed and not reviewed by anyone with contrary views. Rebuttals will not be accepted because they ‘do not add relevance’. Past temperatures will continue to fall, GCR influence will wane faster than a Maundering Sun.
Wiki-pal-ia will be back on track, Nature will be ‘rid of this priest’ and people who really do understand the climate in historical context will never see their works published there. Nature will refer McIntyre’s real science to their off-Broadway publication specialising in the subject where Team reviewers will spike it as irrelevant.
Real Climate will wax pontifical about how there are so many new supporting papers on the subject of blah-blah-blah in the reviewed literature – look for confirmation of blah-blah in an upcoming article…
It might work! It is a pretty good plan – better than steam-bending hockey sticks. Better, that is if you have no morals or integrity and see science as Theatre of the Absurd. Let’s see who buys a ticket.
You need to take a lesson from my Canadian-born father and start rooting for the country of your citizenship: America. Few things are more annoying than someone who becomes a citizen on paper, but not with their heart.