GOOGLE SCHOLAR can more useful than arguing about universities, when assessing a researcher whose name is decently Googleable.

1) Go to Google Scholar.

2) Put someone’s name in and look at the resulting list, which is sorted by “cited by #” counts.

3) Play with name until you’re mostly getting the one you want, “JR Mashey” is trivial, “Robert Smith” is impossible, unless you can add differentiating search terms.

4) Serious people often work with multiple other co-authors, it’s usually more important to be first or second author, although be careful of alphabetized author lists. [We usually did that at Bell Labs.]

5) Learn the names of important journals. Science, Nature, PNAS are generally important; many others are as well, but may need exploration to figure out. Mainline peer-reviewed journals or major scientific societies are important. Energy&Environment, or Journal Scientific Exploration … not so much. Also:

Google: impact factor

of course, GoogleScholar includes many more sources than credible refereed journals, so you have to watch out for tha, and difference between journals and newsletters.

6) Look at the number of citations, and then click on “Cited by:” to see who cites them and where. Work that is frequently cited (unless it’s a batch of refutations!) by other serious researchers in serious journals … is what makes somebody’s reputation. Of course, important older papers will have had time to collect more citations.

7) One must always be careful of well-published scientists, at/near retirement, who then:

a) Start writing about a completely different area.
b) But in OpEds, newspapers, letters-to-editor, web pages
c) But not in peer-reviewed journals
d) Even with a long history of doing serious research

or even, who have done fine work in the area, but not much recently…
(i.e., look at the dates, at least a little)

8) If you haven’t done this before, imagine you’ve never heard of any of these, and see if you can sort out:

a) Long-established prolific, climate researchers
b) Strong younger researchers
c) People not really publishing much peer-reviewed work lately, or ever, or having moved from somewhere else.

je hansen
wf ruddiman
ga schmidt
si akasofu
rs lindzen
b lomborg

and (assuming one didn’t know):

bw brook

“Joke 930!” (much louder laughter than usual)
Newcomer asks why the laughter is louder. “Oh, they’ve never heard that one before.”

You can see an example of using Skeptical Science as reply to David Bellamy : open up all comments, and search for skepticalscience.

This is an example of a size-constrained reply to a short article that managed to include 12-13 wrong arguments. I once saw an OpEd manage to get ~15 hits.

Further, how many people, do you suppose, get promoted to full Professor in their early 30′s? Not many!! To be appointed you have to fulfil various academic criteria, which most cannot achieve until later in life. He really has got to you deniers hasn’t he! Keep up the good work Barry!

Did you mean

It takes way less effort…

???

Interesting CV but which Uni awarded your initial science degree.

If it was a world-class university, in a world-class department, it would mean he has met expectations by having an exceptional career.

If it was a lesser university, it would mean he has exceeded expectations by having an exceptional career.

Which means there’s only one possible reason you’re asking the question: you want to ignore his exceptional career and focus on the university where he got his undergraduate degree.

No one cares. We know you’re an evolutionary-biology denying, climate science denying, physics denying, HIV-AIDS denying troll, and not worthy of attention.