TL;DR
This editorial discusses the peer review process in a statistics journal and emphasizes the importance of statistics and uncertainty assessment in paleoclimatology and climate change debates.
Contribution
It provides insights into the review process and highlights the role of statistical analysis and uncertainty quantification in climate science discourse.
Findings
Highlights the significance of statistical methods in climate change research
Emphasizes the need for rigorous uncertainty assessment in paleoclimatology
Encourages careful review to improve scientific communication
Abstract
Many of you reading these words will have been attracted by the discussion paper [McShane and Wyner (2011)], in which case, this may be the first, but hopefully not the last, time you will have read anything in a statistics journal. I would like to take this opportunity to discuss the review process in our journal and to make some comments about the role of statistics and uncertainty assessment in paleoclimatology and the broader debate about climate change.
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.