Almost two years after the biotic pump paper was published in Hydrology and Earth System Sciences (HESS),
a very critical comment by three well-positioned scientists has just been published in HESS Discussions.
See here for the unfolding discussion. Every member of the scientific community registered at
www.copernicus.org can take part in the discussion and make citable comments that are published
in a separate HESSD volume.
From the critique: "M&G are to be complimented for their valiant attempt to shed more light on the interaction between forest vegetation and precipitation. However, a good understanding of these phenomena should be based on well-founded scientific principles, and not on the kind of ill-conceived ideas which this commentary has shown to be physically untenable."
From our first response: "We find the commentary made by Dr. Meesters, Dr. Dolman and Dr. Bruijnzeel (hereafter MDB) to be most instructive and illustrative. Although, as we argue below, the critique of our results is based on several key physical misunderstandings of atmospheric processes, we believe that publishing this commentary in HESS would be of substantial methodological value, as such misunderstandings, expressed by well-positioned scientists, can be justifiably characterized as widespread. Publication of this commentary will further contribute to the widening discussion of the biotic pump theory and its implications (Chown and Gaston, 2008; Makarieva, Gorshkov and Li, 2008; Sheil and Muridyaso, 2009), the importance of which is not disputed by anybody, including MDB."
What do YOU have to say?
(The discussion is open until March 13th, 2009)