Dr. Ioannidis, an epidemiologist who studies research methods at the University of Ioannina School of Medicine in Greece and Tufts University in Medford, Mass, has documented how, in thousands of peer-reviewed research papers published every year, there may be so much less than meets the eye. He writes in the WSJ as follows:
Most Science Studies Appear to Be Tainted By Sloppy Analysis
We all make mistakes and, if you believe medical scholar John Ioannidis, scientists make more than their fair share. By his calculations, most published research findings are wrong. …
These flawed findings, for the most part, stem not from fraud or formal misconduct, but from more mundane misbehavior: miscalculation, poor study design or self-serving data analysis. “There is an increasing concern that in modern research, false findings may be the majority or even the vast majority of published research claims,” Dr. Ioannidis said. “A new claim about a research finding is more likely to be false than true..
The hotter the field of research the more likely its published findings should be viewed skeptically, he determined.
Sounds to me like he’d support checking for “miscalculation, poor study design or self-serving data analysis” in climate science as well.