Cooking Tol
So over at Retraction Watch, this little interchange
Bob Ward ( http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/politicsandpolicy/archives/41855 ) wrote: “Despite numerous requests, Professor Tol has so far failed to make available the details of these aggregations so that I might check them for further errors.”
Please note that the 2009 paper (Tol, Richard S J. 2009. “The Economic Effects of Climate Change.” Journal of Economic Perspectives, 23(2): 29-51) lists Free University Amsterdam, The Netherlands as one of the affiliated institutes.
Please note that all researchers of Free University Amsterdam must strictly work according to “The Netherlands Code of Conduct for Scientific Practice” ( http://www.vsnu.nl/files/documenten/Domeinen/Onderzoek/The_Netherlands_Code_of_Conduct_for_Scientific_Practice_2012.pdf ).
Page 7 of the Code: “III. Verifiability. Presented information is verifiable. Whenever research results are publicized, it is made clear what the data and the conclusions are based on, where they were derived from and how they can be verified. (…). III.3 Raw research data are stored for at least five years. These data are made available to other scientific practitioners at request.”
I fail to understand why Bob Ward is unable to get these details.
and response
:) Eli had a bit of FUND over there, and needless to say, Richard did not appreciate it much at all
The data are all in the public domain.
Posts
15 comments:
I'm sure the Steve McIntyres of the world will get right on this.
Has anyone coined the term "Tolgate" yet. If not why not?
Explain like I'm five, please.
Is the data location "if you were smart enough you'd be able to find it"? Or
"if you were a qualified researcher you'd be entitled to see it"? (which seems to be JSTOR's requirement). Or
"no private information was used in the creation of this publication, so anything we found you can find too"? Or
Something else?
I've also been wondering about 'Tolgate'.
At the end of every Tolroad there is a Tolgate at which one must pay a Tol.
Eli has the makings of a good Gremlinologist .
Snark is good for those in the know, but snark without also including a straightforward explanation conveys the impression that "they're all the same, all just using rhetoric"
A simple gradeschool level explanation of exactly how and where to find the data and analysis -- as appears to be promised by the rules quoted above -- would make it easier for the young students who may give a damn.
"Climate War and Peace (but mostly war" (by Richard Tol-stoy)
Extracting data from a Tol is a Tol order.
With apologies to John Donne
Send not to ask For Whom the Bell Tols,
It Tols for thee.
Toby
Tol tales ...
Bill W
I agree with Hank - all this snark without an explanation for those of us who are tired/ very busy/ new to the game is important to add.
Such as why you think FUND is related to what Tol claims are his own results re. benefits from 1C of warming, and why Bob Ward can't find the data that Tol claims he can.
I mean we know how much of a dissembling weasel Tol is, but it always helps to hammer it home.
Wholly Tol-edo
For more serious discussion, see Andrew Gelman's The gremlins did it? Iffy statistics drive strong policy recommendations.
Do you suppose Tavris and Aronson - Mistakes Were Made (But Not by Me) - are aware of 'Gremlins intervened in the preparation of my paper...'? ;-)
Post a Comment