Hacker News Reader

Comment by slt2021 | Hacker News Reader

slt2021

this is not science, they just random sampled some research papers and found that they all have consensus opinion on whether humans have effect on climate change.

it is not news to anyone who reads news, as almost every week there is a research paper from another PhD student with claims of anthropogenic cause on climate change of somr sort.

climate researches really should up their game in research RIGOR.

I do understand that garbage like this makes it to HN front due to sensationalist and clickbait title, but so does almost every other climate paper and all of them end up being duds

View on HN

It's a literature review. Pretty common.

so they bring nothing new to the field, just rehash and repeat: "he said this, she said that..."

Agree, this is pretty common for "climate research" and is one of the reasons why climate research has major credibility problems and deniers - there will be people who deny this garbage level "research" due to lack of rigor

Literature reviews are common in all fields, and help to synthesise current understanding, and identify areas of conflict.

This one found that there is near unanimity regarding humans being a major component of climate change. It is not “garbage level”, or lacking rigour. It is a useful contribution to the field.

There is a “credibility problem” because vested interests spend a lot of money trying to undermine research that will hurt them financially. This is thoroughly documented.

literature review is not research in itself, its more like journalism/blogging.

To qualify for research it gotta include materials, methods, conduct experiments, build quantitative models - to have some research rigor applied to the climate domain. Only after that,a researcher can claim some novel contribution based on his own model.

Otherwise it is not climate research (a STEM discipline), but more like blogging/journalism - a a study of what other people write - human sciences type research which lacks rigor and suffers from inability to reproduce research

Considering the statistical overlap between climate change deniers and religiosity, belief in natural medicines, and likelyhood to believe in conspiracy theories. Climate change deniers are not denying it based on the quality of the research. They deny because they want to believe it is false. They want to follow the controversial viewpoint. They want to question the establishment.

It's not exactly a scientific endeavour.

Literature reviews are very common in every field. The number of papers being published in any field is much larger than what researcher can possibly read. Reviews summarizing multiple papers and drawing conclusions are very valuable.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com