The Reference Manual Fails Its Own Test; The National Academies Should Withdraw the Climate Chapter

Short summary

A forensic accountant argues that the Federal Judicial Center's climate science chapter in its evidence reference manual fails to meet the Daubert standards for expert testimony it teaches judges to apply. The chapter presents contested attribution science as settled consensus while relying on non-independent peer review. This risks biasing judicial decisions through cognitive anchoring effects, especially in climate liability lawsuits.

• •Chapter violates its own Daubert standards by presenting contested methodology as settled consensus
• •Peer reviewers included plaintiffs' experts and federal judges, lacking true independence
• •Authoritative reference materials function as cognitive anchors that bias judicial outcomes

Generated with AI, which can make mistakes.