In a September 14 newspaper post titled “Scientist sparks storm by denouncing his climate study,” Patrick T. Brown argued that editors and reviewers prioritize the “pure narrative” and ignore aspects beyond climate modify when selecting which study to publish. Nevertheless, this statement is incorrect. It was Mr. Brown himself, not Nature, who narrowed the concentrate of his study solely to climate modify, as is clearly stated in the opening paragraph of the study paper we published. In addition, publicly out there facts accompanying the paper shows that other climate scientists admitted to excluding other variables for the duration of the evaluation course of action. Mr. Brown himself was against the inclusion of these variables in the final published version of the paper.
Science is devoted to understanding the intricacies of life and the planet by way of rigorous evaluation. Explaining complexity generally calls for an examination of distinct elements, but this really should not be misconstrued as willful ignorance of the relevant aspects, as implied. Every single study paper concentrates on diverse aspects and information, all of which contribute to our understanding. Nevertheless, they ought to be observed as portion of an interconnected and constantly evolving internet of study, exactly where the influence and significance of person operate will differ.
Nature’s publication history is complete of examples that deviate from the distinct narrative Mr. Brown posits. By examining these examples with each other, we can advance our understanding.
Magdalena Skipper
Editor-in-chief of Nature
London