This is a perfect example of peer review and open publication doing it's job. It's one of the main reasons why modern western science, as it's practiced nowadays, is pretty much the gold standard in terms of factual information. Nothing else even comes close.
Note to climate deniers: this scientific process is coalescing against you. In a decade or two, you will be viewed as flat-earthers.
Note to the Chinese government and scientific establishment: You crave the legitimacy that western-style scientific peer review commands. This sort of crap simply won't fly. There's not much you can do to sweep a lie under the rug. Scientists delight in discovering this sort of stuff and calling it out, very loudly. There is very little deference to authority or seniority. In particular, western scientists are nearly impossible to intimidate. Scientists will pay absolutely no attention to the cultural value some of you place on "saving face". If you want this level of legitimacy, you SUBMIT TO THE RIGORS OF THE PROCESS AND TAKE YOUR LUMPS. It's brutal. I know this first-hand.
This is not meant to be a universal statement about Chinese science. They have their share of Nobel laureates who clearly deserve the title. But they also have a bit of a quality problem overall. Peer review is the only solution if they want to improve further.
peer review doing it's job (Score:2)
Note to climate deniers: this scientific process is coalescing against you. In a decade or two, you will be viewed as flat-earthers.
Note to the Chinese government and scientific establishment: You crave the legitimacy that western-style scientific peer review commands. This sort of crap simply won't fly. There's not much you can do to sweep a lie under the rug. Scientists delight in discovering this sort of stuff and calling it out, very loudly. There is very little deference to authority or seniority. In particular, western scientists are nearly impossible to intimidate. Scientists will pay absolutely no attention to the cultural value some of you place on "saving face". If you want this level of legitimacy, you SUBMIT TO THE RIGORS OF THE PROCESS AND TAKE YOUR LUMPS. It's brutal. I know this first-hand.
This is not meant to be a universal statement about Chinese science. They have their share of Nobel laureates who clearly deserve the title. But they also have a bit of a quality problem overall. Peer review is the only solution if they want to improve further.
Re: (Score:2)
Note to climate deniers: this scientific process is coalescing against you. In a decade or two, you will be viewed as flat-earthers.
You're more than a decade behind here. The science already coalesced, got challenged repeatedly by the deniers, who had their assertions proven false.