Breitbart has some really bad news.
Fewer than 1 percent of papers published in scientific journals follow the scientific method, according to research by Wharton School professor and forecasting expert J. Scott Armstrong.
Professor Armstrong, who co-founded the peer-reviewed Journal of Forecasting in 1982 and the International Journal of Forecasting in 1985, made the claim in a presentation about what he considers to be â€œalarmismâ€ from forecasters over man-made climate change.
â€œWe also go through journals and rate how well they conform to the scientific method. I used to think that maybe 10 percent of papers in my field â€¦ were maybe useful. Now it looks like maybe, one tenth of one percent follow the scientific methodâ€ said Armstrong in his presentation, which can be watched in full below. â€œPeople just donâ€™t do it.â€
Armstrong defined eight criteria for compliance with the scientific method, including full disclosure of methods, data, and other reliable information, conclusions that are consistent with the evidence, valid and simple methods, and valid and reliable data.
According to Armstrong, very little of the forecasting in climate change debate adheres to these criteria. â€œFor example, for disclosure, we were working on polar bear [population] forecasts, and we were asked to review the governmentâ€™s polar bear forecast. We asked, â€˜could you send us the dataâ€™ and they said â€˜Noâ€™â€¦ So we had to do it without knowing what the data were.â€
According to Armstrong, forecasts from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) violate all eight criteria.
â€œWhy is this all happening? Nobody asks them!â€ said Armstrong, who says that people who submit papers to journals are not required to follow the scientific method.