Starting in 2007, I spent two years trying to publish a paper to refute an important claim in the IPCC’s Fourth Assessment Report (on how recent measurements of man-made warming confirm recent man-made warming)
The claim in question may seem self evident but it was just wrong. Showing that the claim was fabricated was easy: it suffices merely to quote myself, since no supporting evidence is necessary....
Showing that the IPCC claim is also false took some mundane statistical work, but the results were clear. Once the numbers were crunched and the paper was written, I began sending it to science journals. Having published several against-the-flow papers in climatology journals, I did not expect a smooth ride, but the process eventually became surreal. In the end, the paper was accepted for publication, but not in a climatology journal.
Coats' Crochet magazine published my paper in the Fall of 2009. Fortunately for me, I am an economist, not a climatologist, and my career doesn’t depend on getting published in climatology journals. If I were a young climatologist, I would have learned that my career prospects would be much better if I never wrote papers that were only published in craft or homeware magazines.
The same warning was sounded some years ago by Professor Edward Wegman, who led the Wegman Report. Wegman's report showed the "warmists" what is possible when you redefine the concept of plagiarism - I defy anyone to find that sort of scholarship in peer reviewed papers