Halvard Buhaug and numerous coauthors have released a comment titled “One effect to rule them all? A comment on climate and conflict” which critiques research on climate and human conflict that I published in Science and Climatic Change with my coauthors Marshall Burke and Edward Miguel.
The comment does not address the actual content of our papers. Instead it states that our papers say things they do not say (or that our papers do not say thing they actually do say) and then uses those inaccurate claims as evidence that our work is erroneous.
I have posted my reaction to the comment on the G-FEED blog, written as the referee report that I would write if I were asked to referee the comment.
(This is not the first time Buhaug and I have disagreed on what constitutes evidence. Kyle Meng and I recently published a paper in PNAS demonstrating that Buhaug’s 2010 critique of an earlier paper made aggressive claims that the earlier paper was wrong without actually providing evidence to support those claims.)