Was I being unfair to Energy and Environment when I described it as a forum for laundering pseudo-science? I mean, didn’t they reject Schulte? According to Boehmer-Christiansen:
For your information, I have informed Dr.Schulte that I am happy to publish his own research findings on the effect on patients of climate alamism/’Angst’.
His survey of papers critical of the consensus was a bit patchy and nothing new, as you point out. it was not what was of interest to me; nothing has been published.
Nothing had been published when she wrote that, but now his patchy and nothing new survey of papers has been published in Energy and Environment. (And there weren’t any significant changes to it.) (Hat tip: bi)
Meanwhile Theo has used the EG Beck methodology to disprove the consensus that pi is a constant.
Monckton should do a piece on this and Schulte should plagiarize it.