Misplaced Pages

Pattern Recognition in Physics: Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 12:34, 24 March 2014 editIntuitive2000 (talk | contribs)27 edits Undid revision 600986899 by TheRedPenOfDoom (talk)← Previous edit Revision as of 12:34, 24 March 2014 edit undoIntuitive2000 (talk | contribs)27 edits Undid revision 600986661 by TheRedPenOfDoom (talk)Next edit →
Line 35: Line 35:
After a special issue of the journal was published in December 2013, which contained a paper in which the authors said they "doubt the continued, even accelerated, warming as claimed by the IPCC project,"<ref>{{cite journal |url=http://www.pattern-recogn-phys.net/1/205/2013/prp-1-205-2013.pdf |title=General conclusions regarding the planetary–solar–terrestrial interaction |author=Mörner, Nils-Axel |journal=Pattern Recognition in Physics |date=December 2013 |volume=1 |issue=1 |pages=205–206}}</ref> managing director Martin Rasmussen expressed concern regarding this journal; he also said that "the editors selected the referees on a nepotistic basis, which we regard as malpractice in scientific publishing."<ref name=SI>{{cite web |url=http://news.sciencemag.org/physics/2014/01/alleging-malpractice-climate-skeptic-papers-publisher-kills-journal |title=Alleging 'Malpractice' With Climate Skeptic Papers, Publisher Kills Journal |work=] |date=17 January 2014 |accessdate=11 February 2014 |author=Stokstad, Erik}}</ref> On January 17, 2014, Copernicus Publications announced that they were terminating the journal, citing both the statement that questioned the IPCC's prediction of continued global warming and the "nepotistic" appointing of similarly-minded scientists to the journal's editorial board.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2014/01/20/was-a-scientific-journal-canned-for-disagreeing-with-the-ipcc/ |title=Was a scientific journal canned for disagreeing with the IPCC? |work=] |date=20 January 2014 |accessdate=11 February 2014 |author=Adler, Jonathan H.}}</ref> After a special issue of the journal was published in December 2013, which contained a paper in which the authors said they "doubt the continued, even accelerated, warming as claimed by the IPCC project,"<ref>{{cite journal |url=http://www.pattern-recogn-phys.net/1/205/2013/prp-1-205-2013.pdf |title=General conclusions regarding the planetary–solar–terrestrial interaction |author=Mörner, Nils-Axel |journal=Pattern Recognition in Physics |date=December 2013 |volume=1 |issue=1 |pages=205–206}}</ref> managing director Martin Rasmussen expressed concern regarding this journal; he also said that "the editors selected the referees on a nepotistic basis, which we regard as malpractice in scientific publishing."<ref name=SI>{{cite web |url=http://news.sciencemag.org/physics/2014/01/alleging-malpractice-climate-skeptic-papers-publisher-kills-journal |title=Alleging 'Malpractice' With Climate Skeptic Papers, Publisher Kills Journal |work=] |date=17 January 2014 |accessdate=11 February 2014 |author=Stokstad, Erik}}</ref> On January 17, 2014, Copernicus Publications announced that they were terminating the journal, citing both the statement that questioned the IPCC's prediction of continued global warming and the "nepotistic" appointing of similarly-minded scientists to the journal's editorial board.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2014/01/20/was-a-scientific-journal-canned-for-disagreeing-with-the-ipcc/ |title=Was a scientific journal canned for disagreeing with the IPCC? |work=] |date=20 January 2014 |accessdate=11 February 2014 |author=Adler, Jonathan H.}}</ref>


In the re-opening editorial of the journal, Nils-Axel Mörner rejected Martin Rasmussen's arguments stating: "In your decision, I think you violate the freedom of science and freedom of speech. I can do nothing but condemn your decision as unjust, unethical and ulti anti-scientific."<ref name=MO1>{{cite journal |url=http://www.pattern-recognition-in-physics.com/pub/prp-2-27-2014.pdf |title=Editorial: Re-opening of Pattern Recognition in Physics |author=Mörner, N.-A. |journal=Pattern Recognition in Physics |date=07 March 2014 |volume=2 |issue=2 |pages=27–29}}</ref> Mörner explained that: 1) "It is just to look up the content of the published PRP-volumes 1<ref name=PRP1>{{cite journal |url=http://www.pattern-recogn-phys.net/1/issue1.html |title= PRP Volume 1 |author= |journal=Pattern Recognition in Physics |date= 2013 |volume=1 |issue= 1 |pages=1-206}}</ref> and 2<ref name=PRP2>{{cite journal |url=http://www.pattern-recogn-phys.net/2/issue1.html |title= PRP Volume 2 |author= |journal=Pattern Recognition in Physics |date= 2014 |volume=2 |issue= 1 |pages=1-26}}</ref> to realize that the agreed aims & scope was fulfilled, and that no special focus on climate-research-related topics existed;" 2) "In the general conclusions of the special issue,<ref name=SI2>{{cite journal |url=http://www.pattern-recogn-phys.net/special_issue2.html |title=Pattern in solar variability, their planetary origin and terrestrial impacts |author=Mörner, N.-A., Tattersall, R., Solheim, J.-E. |journal=Pattern Recognition in Physics |date= 2013-2014 |volume=1-2 |issue= Special Issue |pages=}}</ref> 19 scientists had joined in a conclusion that we – from a solar-planetary point of view – are on our way into a grand solar minimum, which 'sheds serious doubts on the issue of a continued, even accelerated, warming as claimed by the IPCC.' In the mind of Rasmussen this logical statement posed an intolerable criticism of the IPCC, and the journal was shut down. If anything in modern society should not be tolerated, it is a censorship in conflict with ethics and scientific norms."<ref name=MO1>{{cite journal |url=http://www.pattern-recognition-in-physics.com/pub/prp-2-27-2014.pdf |title=Editorial: Re-opening of Pattern Recognition in Physics |author=Mörner, N.-A. |journal=Pattern Recognition in Physics |date=07 March 2014 |volume=2 |issue=2 |pages=27–29}}</ref> Mörner also demonstrated that the original statement published by Rasmussen on the morning of January 17, 2014 to justify the closure of the journal mentioned exclusively Rasmussen's objection that "things had been published which questioned the correctness of the global warming scenarios of the IPCC."<ref name=MO1>{{cite journal |url=http://www.pattern-recognition-in-physics.com/pub/prp-2-27-2014.pdf |title=Editorial: Re-opening of Pattern Recognition in Physics |author=Mörner, N.-A. |journal=Pattern Recognition in Physics |date=07 March 2014 |volume=2 |issue=2 |pages=27–29}}</ref> About Rasmussen's second concern that "the editors selected the referees on a nepotistic basis" Mörner noted that it was not present in the morning online statement and stated: "in the afternoon of January 17, 2014 an additional `reason' appeared on the online statement – as it seems – in the act of diverging the attention of the public to something else... We certainly do not recall any nomination of reviewers on such a base: on the contrary, only specialists on the issues in question were asked to review the papers."<ref name=MO1>{{cite journal |url=http://www.pattern-recognition-in-physics.com/pub/prp-2-27-2014.pdf |title=Editorial: Re-opening of Pattern Recognition in Physics |author=Mörner, N.-A. |journal=Pattern Recognition in Physics |date=07 March 2014 |volume=2 |issue=2 |pages=27–29}}</ref> In the re-opening editorial of the journal, ] rejected Martin Rasmussen's arguments stating: "In your decision, I think you violate the freedom of science and freedom of speech. I can do nothing but condemn your decision as unjust, unethical and ultra anti-scientific."<ref name=MO1>{{cite journal |url=http://www.pattern-recognition-in-physics.com/pub/prp-2-27-2014.pdf |title=Editorial: Re-opening of Pattern Recognition in Physics |author=Mörner, N.-A. |journal=Pattern Recognition in Physics |date=07 March 2014 |volume=2 |issue=2 |pages=27–29}}</ref> Mörner explained that: 1) "It is just to look up the content of the published PRP-volumes 1<ref name=PRP1>{{cite journal |url=http://www.pattern-recogn-phys.net/1/issue1.html |title= PRP Volume 1 |author= |journal=Pattern Recognition in Physics |date= 2013 |volume=1 |issue= 1 |pages=1-206}}</ref> and 2<ref name=PRP2>{{cite journal |url=http://www.pattern-recogn-phys.net/2/issue1.html |title= PRP Volume 2 |author= |journal=Pattern Recognition in Physics |date= 2014 |volume=2 |issue= 1 |pages=1-26}}</ref> to realize that the agreed aims & scope was fulfilled, and that no special focus on climate-research-related topics existed;" 2) "In the general conclusions of the special issue,<ref name=SI2>{{cite journal |url=http://www.pattern-recogn-phys.net/special_issue2.html |title=Pattern in solar variability, their planetary origin and terrestrial impacts |author=Mörner, N.-A., Tattersall, R., Solheim, J.-E. |journal=Pattern Recognition in Physics |date= 2013-2014 |volume=1-2 |issue= Special Issue |pages=}}</ref> 19 scientists had joined in a conclusion that we – from a solar-planetary point of view – are on our way into a grand solar minimum, which 'sheds serious doubts on the issue of a continued, even accelerated, warming as claimed by the IPCC.' In the mind of Rasmussen this logical statement posed an intolerable criticism of the IPCC, and the journal was shut down. If anything in modern society should not be tolerated, it is a censorship in conflict with ethics and scientific norms."<ref name=MO1>{{cite journal |url=http://www.pattern-recognition-in-physics.com/pub/prp-2-27-2014.pdf |title=Editorial: Re-opening of Pattern Recognition in Physics |author=Mörner, N.-A. |journal=Pattern Recognition in Physics |date=07 March 2014 |volume=2 |issue=2 |pages=27–29}}</ref> Mörner also demonstrated that the original statement published by Rasmussen on the morning of January 17, 2014 to justify the closure of the journal mentioned exclusively Rasmussen's objection that "things had been published which questioned the correctness of the global warming scenarios of the IPCC."<ref name=MO1>{{cite journal |url=http://www.pattern-recognition-in-physics.com/pub/prp-2-27-2014.pdf |title=Editorial: Re-opening of Pattern Recognition in Physics |author=Mörner, N.-A. |journal=Pattern Recognition in Physics |date=07 March 2014 |volume=2 |issue=2 |pages=27–29}}</ref> About Rasmussen's second concern that "the editors selected the referees on a nepotistic basis" Mörner noted that it was not present in the morning online statement and stated: "in the afternoon of January 17, 2014 an additional `reason' appeared on the online statement – as it seems – in the act of diverging the attention of the public to something else... We certainly do not recall any nomination of reviewers on such a base: on the contrary, only specialists on the issues in question were asked to review the papers."<ref name=MO1>{{cite journal |url=http://www.pattern-recognition-in-physics.com/pub/prp-2-27-2014.pdf |title=Editorial: Re-opening of Pattern Recognition in Physics |author=Mörner, N.-A. |journal=Pattern Recognition in Physics |date=07 March 2014 |volume=2 |issue=2 |pages=27–29}}</ref>


On January 17, IPCC author James Annan wrote: "Kudos to Copernicus for the rapid and decisive way in which they dealt with this problem... I emailed various people to express my concerns and the journal ... was closed down within 24h."<ref name=JA>{{cite web |url=http://julesandjames.blogspot.co.uk/2014/01/recognising-pattern.html |title= Recognising a pattern |work=] |date=17 January 2014 |accessdate= |author=Annan, James}}</ref> British blogger, Roger Tallbloke commented Annan's action as a typical "anti-scientic intimidation of Journal Editors and Publishers by IPCC Authors"<ref name=RT>{{cite web |url=http://tallbloke.wordpress.com/2014/02/07/anti-scientic-intimidation-of-journal-editors-and-publishers-by-ipcc-authors/ |title=Anti-scientic intimidation of Journal Editors and Publishers by IPCC Authors On January 17, IPCC author ] wrote: "Kudos to Copernicus for the rapid and decisive way in which they dealt with this problem... I emailed various people to express my concerns and the journal ... was closed down within 24h."<ref name=JA>{{cite web |url=http://julesandjames.blogspot.co.uk/2014/01/recognising-pattern.html |title= Recognising a pattern |work= James' Empty Blog |date=17 January 2014 |accessdate= |author=Annan, James}}</ref> British blogger, Roger Tallbloke commented Annan's action as a typical "anti-scientic intimidation of Journal Editors and Publishers by IPCC Authors"<ref name=RT>{{cite web |url=http://tallbloke.wordpress.com/2014/02/07/anti-scientic-intimidation-of-journal-editors-and-publishers-by-ipcc-authors/ |title=Anti-scientic intimidation of Journal Editors and Publishers by IPCC Authors
|work=] |date=7 February 2014 |accessdate= |author=TallBloke, Roger}}</ref>. German Prof. Fritz Vahrenholt criticized Copernicus's decision stating that "The name Martin Rasmussen however now has found a special place in the history of science, directly on par with Trofim Denissovitch Lyssenko."<ref name=FV1>{{cite web |url=http://notrickszone.com/2014/01/19/scientists-react-sharply-to-copernicus-publishing-censorship-of-alternative-scientific-explanations-do-you-realize-what-you-have-done/ |title=Scientists React Sharply To Copernicus Publishing Censorship Of Alternative Scientific Explanations: “Do You Realize What You Have Done?” |work=] |date=19 January 2014 |accessdate= |author=Gosselin, Pierre}}</ref> German based blogger Pierre Gosselin commented: "Clearly this really gets down to suppressing alternative views that threaten the popular global warming science."<ref name=PG1>{{cite web |url=http://notrickszone.com/2014/02/14/the-real-motivation-behind-prp-journal-shutdown-exposed-it-challenged-ipcc-science/ |title=The Real Motivation Behind PRP Journal Shutdown Exposed: It Challenged IPCC Science! |work=] |date=14 February 2014 |accessdate= |author=Gosselin, Pierre}}</ref> |work= TallBloke's Talkshop |date=7 February 2014 |accessdate= |author=TallBloke, Roger}}</ref>. German Prof. ] criticized Copernicus's decision stating that "The name Martin Rasmussen however now has found a special place in the history of science, directly on par with ]."<ref name=FV1>{{cite web |url=http://notrickszone.com/2014/01/19/scientists-react-sharply-to-copernicus-publishing-censorship-of-alternative-scientific-explanations-do-you-realize-what-you-have-done/ |title=Scientists React Sharply To Copernicus Publishing Censorship Of Alternative Scientific Explanations: “Do You Realize What You Have Done?” |work= NoTricksZone |date=19 January 2014 |accessdate= |author=Gosselin, Pierre}}</ref> Germany based blogger Pierre Gosselin commented: "Clearly this really gets down to suppressing alternative views that threaten the popular global warming science."<ref name=PG1>{{cite web |url=http://notrickszone.com/2014/02/14/the-real-motivation-behind-prp-journal-shutdown-exposed-it-challenged-ipcc-science/ |title=The Real Motivation Behind PRP Journal Shutdown Exposed: It Challenged IPCC Science! |work= NoTricksZone |date=14 February 2014 |accessdate= |author=Gosselin, Pierre}}</ref> Australian blogger Joanne Nova noted that the reasons given by Copernicus publishers "had nothing to do with the data, the logic, and they cite no errors...the primary objection was `doubt of the IPCC' and this shows in their original Termination page as well as in their emails to authors. The `nepotism' excuse appeared later, probably when they realized how pathetic their reasoning was as the authors pointed out in their replies."<ref name=JN>{{cite web |url=http://joannenova.com.au/2014/01/science-paper-doubts-ipcc-so-whole-journal-gets-terminated/ |title=Science paper doubts IPCC, so whole journal gets terminated! |work= JoNova |date=18 January 2014 |accessdate= |author=Nova, Joanne}}</ref>




Revision as of 12:34, 24 March 2014

This article is an orphan, as no other articles link to it. Please introduce links to this page from related articles; try the Find link tool for suggestions. (March 2014)
Academic journal
Pattern Recogn Phys doesn't exist. Please verify that |abbreviation=Pattern Recogn. Phys. in {{Infobox journal}} is the correct ISO 4 abbreviation. (Or search the LTWA manually, see directions). Then create a redirect to this article by following this link.
Pattern Recognition in Physics
DisciplinePhysics
LanguageEnglish
Edited bySid-Ali Ouadfeul
Publication details
History2013-2014
PublisherCopernicus Publications
Open accessYes
Standard abbreviations
ISO 4 (alt) · Bluebook (alt)
NLM (alt) · MathSciNet (alt Paid subscription required)
ISO 4Pattern Recogn. Phys.
Indexing
CODEN (alt · alt2) · JSTOR (alt) · LCCN (alt)
MIAR · NLM (alt) · Scopus
ISSN2195-9250
OCLC no.858879687

Pattern Recognition in Physics was an open-access journal originally published by Copernicus Publications which was established in March 2013 and terminated in January 2014. The editors-in-chief were Sid-Ali Ouadfeul (Algerian Petroleum Institute) and Nils-Axel Mörner, the latter of whom is a well-known climate change skeptic. Copernicus ceased its publication due to concerns over the publications views towards the scientific consensus of global climate change and the method of peer review. In March 2014 Sid-Ali Ouadfeul reopened the journal under a different publisher.

History

Copernicus agreed to publish the journal because the editors claimed that its aim would be "to publish articles about patterns recognized in the full spectrum of physical disciplines rather than to focus on climate-research-related topics." Concerns regarding the journal's peer-review process were first raised in July 2013 by Jeffrey Beall, an American librarian and critic of predatory open access publishing. Beall wrote on his blog that Ouadfeul's research has "only been cited a couple times," and went on to accuse him of self-plagiarizing from a book he had written in 2012, entitled "Wavelet Transforms and Their Recent Applications in Biology and Geoscience." Beall concluded that "This is not a good start for a journal, and the publisher ought to be concerned and take action."

After a special issue of the journal was published in December 2013, which contained a paper in which the authors said they "doubt the continued, even accelerated, warming as claimed by the IPCC project," managing director Martin Rasmussen expressed concern regarding this journal; he also said that "the editors selected the referees on a nepotistic basis, which we regard as malpractice in scientific publishing." On January 17, 2014, Copernicus Publications announced that they were terminating the journal, citing both the statement that questioned the IPCC's prediction of continued global warming and the "nepotistic" appointing of similarly-minded scientists to the journal's editorial board.

In the re-opening editorial of the journal, Nils-Axel Mörner rejected Martin Rasmussen's arguments stating: "In your decision, I think you violate the freedom of science and freedom of speech. I can do nothing but condemn your decision as unjust, unethical and ultra anti-scientific." Mörner explained that: 1) "It is just to look up the content of the published PRP-volumes 1 and 2 to realize that the agreed aims & scope was fulfilled, and that no special focus on climate-research-related topics existed;" 2) "In the general conclusions of the special issue, 19 scientists had joined in a conclusion that we – from a solar-planetary point of view – are on our way into a grand solar minimum, which 'sheds serious doubts on the issue of a continued, even accelerated, warming as claimed by the IPCC.' In the mind of Rasmussen this logical statement posed an intolerable criticism of the IPCC, and the journal was shut down. If anything in modern society should not be tolerated, it is a censorship in conflict with ethics and scientific norms." Mörner also demonstrated that the original statement published by Rasmussen on the morning of January 17, 2014 to justify the closure of the journal mentioned exclusively Rasmussen's objection that "things had been published which questioned the correctness of the global warming scenarios of the IPCC." About Rasmussen's second concern that "the editors selected the referees on a nepotistic basis" Mörner noted that it was not present in the morning online statement and stated: "in the afternoon of January 17, 2014 an additional `reason' appeared on the online statement – as it seems – in the act of diverging the attention of the public to something else... We certainly do not recall any nomination of reviewers on such a base: on the contrary, only specialists on the issues in question were asked to review the papers."

On January 17, IPCC author James Annan wrote: "Kudos to Copernicus for the rapid and decisive way in which they dealt with this problem... I emailed various people to express my concerns and the journal ... was closed down within 24h." British blogger, Roger Tallbloke commented Annan's action as a typical "anti-scientic intimidation of Journal Editors and Publishers by IPCC Authors". German Prof. Fritz Vahrenholt criticized Copernicus's decision stating that "The name Martin Rasmussen however now has found a special place in the history of science, directly on par with Trofim Denisovich Lysenko." Germany based blogger Pierre Gosselin commented: "Clearly this really gets down to suppressing alternative views that threaten the popular global warming science." Australian blogger Joanne Nova noted that the reasons given by Copernicus publishers "had nothing to do with the data, the logic, and they cite no errors...the primary objection was `doubt of the IPCC' and this shows in their original Termination page as well as in their emails to authors. The `nepotism' excuse appeared later, probably when they realized how pathetic their reasoning was as the authors pointed out in their replies."


References

  1. Castelvecchi, Davide (20 January 2014). "Climate comments push open-access publisher to terminate journal". Nature News Blog. Retrieved 11 February 2014.
  2. "Pattern Recognition in Physics". March, 2014. {{cite journal}}: Check date values in: |date= (help); Cite journal requires |journal= (help)
  3. ^ Stokstad, Erik (17 January 2014). "Alleging 'Malpractice' With Climate Skeptic Papers, Publisher Kills Journal". Science Insider. Retrieved 11 February 2014.
  4. Beall, Jeffrey (16 July 2013). "Recognizing a Pattern of Problems in "Pattern Recognition in Physics"". Scholarlyoa.com. Retrieved 11 February 2014.
  5. Mörner, Nils-Axel (December 2013). "General conclusions regarding the planetary–solar–terrestrial interaction" (PDF). Pattern Recognition in Physics. 1 (1): 205–206.
  6. Adler, Jonathan H. (20 January 2014). "Was a scientific journal canned for disagreeing with the IPCC?". The Washington Post. Retrieved 11 February 2014.
  7. ^ Mörner, N.-A. (07 March 2014). "Editorial: Re-opening of Pattern Recognition in Physics" (PDF). Pattern Recognition in Physics. 2 (2): 27–29. {{cite journal}}: Check date values in: |date= (help)
  8. "PRP Volume 1". Pattern Recognition in Physics. 1 (1): 1–206. 2013.
  9. "PRP Volume 2". Pattern Recognition in Physics. 2 (1): 1–26. 2014.
  10. Mörner, N.-A., Tattersall, R., Solheim, J.-E. (2013–2014). "Pattern in solar variability, their planetary origin and terrestrial impacts". Pattern Recognition in Physics. 1–2 (Special Issue).{{cite journal}}: CS1 maint: date format (link) CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)
  11. Annan, James (17 January 2014). "Recognising a pattern". James' Empty Blog.
  12. TallBloke, Roger (7 February 2014). "Anti-scientic intimidation of Journal Editors and Publishers by IPCC Authors". TallBloke's Talkshop.
  13. Gosselin, Pierre (19 January 2014). "Scientists React Sharply To Copernicus Publishing Censorship Of Alternative Scientific Explanations: "Do You Realize What You Have Done?"". NoTricksZone.
  14. Gosselin, Pierre (14 February 2014). "The Real Motivation Behind PRP Journal Shutdown Exposed: It Challenged IPCC Science!". NoTricksZone.
  15. Nova, Joanne (18 January 2014). "Science paper doubts IPCC, so whole journal gets terminated!". JoNova.
Categories: