Saturday Silliness – Skip to the Lew

Dr. Stephan Lewandowsy’s recent claim that because skeptics and lukewarmers alike ask to see emails, it amounts to conspiracy theory

So now there’s a conspiracy theory going around that I didn’t contact them.

…has inspired Josh yet again.

Please visit Cartoons by Josh and consider dropping into the Tip Jar

Simon at Australian Climate Madness notes:

You can sense the contempt Lewandowsky holds for those who dare question his methods in the tone employed here. I guess he thought he could brand all sceptics as conspiratorial nut-nut jobs and we’d just quietly slink away and say, “Yeah, you’re right, we are nut-jobs”. And his defence mechanism to this criticism is to resort to childish sarcasm in his responses – as one commenter puts it, how “professorial” is that, professor?

The climate data they don't want you to find — free, to your inbox.
Join readers who get 5–8 new articles daily — no algorithms, no shadow bans.
0 0 votes
Article Rating
56 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Eddie Sharp
September 9, 2012 3:21 am

It rather begs the question, what does UWA stand for ?
Particularly when stamped on every sheet of this paper.

Richdo
September 9, 2012 6:01 am

On the whole it seems Lewandowski would (as would we all) be well told to read the preface to the Sceptical Chymist by Robert Boye, (http://www.gutenberg.org/files/22914/22914-h/22914-h.htm) …
“And indeed, I am not sorry to have this Opportunity of giving an example how to manage even Disputes with Civility; whence perhaps some Readers will be assisted to discern a Difference betwixt Bluntness of speech and Strength of reason, and find that a man may be a Champion for Truth, without being an Enemy to Civility; and may confute an Opinion without railing at Them that hold it; To whom he that desires to convince and not to provoke them, must make some amends by his Civility to their Persons, for his severity to their mistakes; and must say as little else as he can, to displease them, when he says that they are in an error.”

September 9, 2012 6:03 am

Yoshi Sheva says:
September 8, 2012 at 9:46 pm
The moon landings may have been faked, I don’t know, I have not looked into it. I assume that they were not, but it is not my expertise. Does that make me Skeptical? Or just that I am smart enough to not state categorically that “the moon landings were not faked” when I don’t know anything about it? Does NASA want me to make a religious statement affirming my belief in the moon landings to prove that I am not crazy? Am I disallowed to talk about anything just because I have not researched the moon landings and am ready to state that it happened?
=================================================================
In case you were serious about the moon landings being faked, here’s a pretty good an simple look at some of the ideas put forth by those who think they were faked. Their ideas don’t hold up.
http://mythbustersresults.com/nasa-moon-landing

Richdo
September 9, 2012 6:03 am

oops That’s Robert Boyle, duhh

Rosco
September 9, 2012 1:30 pm

Seriously – climate alarmists have done enormous damage to the standing of the academic award of PhD – in fact the standing of science in the public perception.
How do some of these people get their PhD’s ? Certainly not for respect for individual, original research.

David A. Evans
September 9, 2012 3:05 pm

What’s slipping under the radar while this non-event is up-front?
DaveE.