Professor Glibert’s departure

What should one take away from Professor Glibert’s decision to publish her nitrate conclusions on the Delta and subsequent resignation from the Delta NAS panel?

That her methods were poor or her conclusions incorrect? No one knows, but chances are that Glibert’s take that nitrates are big local and regional contributors to the Delta’s ecosystem problems will hold water.

(Please take note that the DNP chooses not to characterize her conclusions as “nitrates are The Primary Problem” until we read this in something she has written.)

That some of her research was funded by vested interests? Well, we do know that, but really, who’s isn’t, here, except for the “research” of local interests? And are they scientists?

That she is now a criminal, committing the crime of publishing ahead and outside the deliberations of her NAS panel colleagues? Only she knows her motives.

What the DNP takes away at present is that Prof. Glibert acted with insufficient respect to her Delta NAS colleagues or regard to their charge and process.

At present we have little information and no idea why she chose to do this.

The DNP doubts that Glibert just wanted to give everyone a new reason to be suspicious. So what was it?

Was it simply innocent/naive impatience? Absolute belief? Selfishness? A deaf political ear? All of the above?

We remain curious to hear Glibert’s account.