Ik ga het originele artikel nu niet lezen (zie
hier +
discussie), maar waarom is het volgens jouw controversieel? Misschien wat apart dat het nu 'opeens' als nieuws wordt gebracht. Het artikel stamp uit 2010 en het idee van de 'biotic pump' is nog wel wat jaartjes ouder.
De afname van regen en wind gaat ook over de regenwouden, jouw titel suggereert een beetje alsof nergens ter wereld meer zal waaien of regenen.
Hier staat nog wat discussie over eerder artikel, commentaar van oa HHG Savenije, professor aan de TU Delft (leuk dat dat openbaar is gemaakt). Zie ook andere commentaren rechts bovenin bij "Comments and responses".
The authors have presented an entirely new view of what may be driving dynamics in the atmosphere. This new theory has been subject to considerable criticism which any reader can see in the public review and interactive discussion of
the manuscript in ACPD (http://www.atmos-chem-phys-discuss.net/10/24015/2010/
acpd-10-24015-2010-discussion.html). Normally, the negative reviewer comments
would not lead to final acceptance and publication of a manuscript in ACP. After extensive deliberation however, the editor concluded that the revised manuscript still should
be published – despite the strong criticism from the esteemed reviewers – to promote continuation of the scientific dialogue on the controversial theory. This is not an endorsement or confirmation of the theory, but rather a call for further development of the
arguments presented in the paper that shall lead to conclusive disproof or validation by
the scientific community. In addition to the above manuscript-specific comment from
the handling editor, the following lines from the ACP executive committee shall provide
a general explanation for the exceptional approach taken in this case and the precedent
set for potentially similar future cases:
(1) The paper is highly controversial, proposing
a fundamentally new view that seems to be in contradiction to common textbook knowledge.
(2) The majority of reviewers and experts in the field seem to disagree, whereas
some colleagues provide support, and the handling editor (and the executive committee) are not convinced that the new view presented in the controversial paper is wrong.
(3) The handling editor (and the executive committee) concluded to allow final publication of the manuscript in ACP, in order to facilitate further development of the presented
arguments, which may lead to disproof or validation by the scientific community.
bron:
klik
Quote selectie