Lewandowsky's big 'conspiracy theory' seems to be more about his own actions

Steve McIntyre writes:

Lewandowsky Ghost-wrote Conclusions of UWA Ethics Investigation into “Hoax”

Following the retraction of Lewandowsky’s Fury, the validity of University of Western Australia ethics “investigations” is again in the news. At present, we have negligible information on the University’s investigation into Fury, but we do have considerable (previously unanalysed) information on their earlier and illusory “investigation” into prior complaints about the ethics application for Moon Landing Hoax (“Hoax”).

This earlier “investigation” (recently cited at desmog here and Hot Whopper here) supposedly found that the issues that I had raised in October 2012 were “baseless” and that the research in Hoax was “conducted in compliance with all applicable ethical guidelines”.

However, these conclusions were not written by a university investigation or university official but by Lewandowsky himself and simply transferred to university letterhead by UWA Deputy Vice Chancellor Robyn Owens within minutes after Lewandowsky had sent her language that was acceptable to him.

In today’s post, I’ll set out a detailed chronology of these remarkable events.

The Ethics Application for Hoax

Simon Turnill originally discovered and reported the machinations of Lewandowsky’s ethics application for Lewandowsky’s Hoax (noted up at CA here).

Hoax was published under the supposed authority of the University’s ethics permit RA/4/1/4007, a permit which had been originally issued for an entirely unrelated project under which pedestrians in Perth were interviewed about their “understanding of statistical trends in time series data”. The original ethics application included an ethics checklist, which, according to Australian policy, included the following question whether the research involved any deception or concealment: “Does the research involve active concealment of information from participants and/or planned deception of participants”. To which Lewandowsky answered “NO”.

By August 2010, Lewandowsky had become bored with the time series project and instead wanted to show that skeptics were conspiracy theorists. Instead of interviewing pedestrians in downtown Perth about trends, Lewandowsky wanted to do an internet survey about conspiracy theories.

Lewandowsky’s new project was so different from the existing approval that many important sections of the existing application ceased to apply (even the purpose of the study as stated in the original application no longer applied.) But instead of filing a new ethics approval for the entirely different project, Lewandowsky chose instead to pass off the new project as merely an amendment to his existing project, falsely assuring the ethics administrator in an amendment request that the survey would only be “modified slightly”:

read more: http://climateaudit.org/2014/03/24/lewandowsky-ghost-wrote-conclusions-of-uwa-ethics-investigation-into-hoax/

Advertisements

  Subscribe  
newest oldest most voted
Notify of
Stephen Richards

The greenie beenies would do well to remember the old sayings when it comes to Steve Mc. You know, like “let sleeping dogs lie, Don’t poke the bear, light the blue touch paper and run for cover”. You have to admire SteveMc. There is no-one like him on the blogs or in academia.

KNR

Hands up anyone that is surprised?
Makes you wonder how settled , ‘settled science’ has to come before such smoke ,mirrors and BS are not needed.

Colorado Wellington

I just finished reading the remainder at Climate Audit. Disgusting but not surprising. What can anyone add?
Maybe what Reagan said—after provoking “audible gasps” of assembled Washington press corps by accurately describing the Soviet Union’s Marxist-Leninist approach to morality. At the end of his 1981 press conference he asked Richard Allen, his National Security Advisor:
“But Dick, the Soviets do lie and steal and cheat, don’t they?”
“Yes sir, they do,” Allen replied. Reagan smiled and said, “I thought so.”

rogerknights

Pal review at work. Wackademia at work. A view into a sewer from a glass-bottomed boat.

I guess they will get away with it in the short term, just as Mann has. But in the long run, how many people seek to emulate Lysenko?
Scratch that. Apparently many do – in climate science and University ethics apparently (the new oxymoron – University Ethics).

David Jones

I wonder if anyone at Bristol University is reading this!

Colorado Wellington

rogerknights says:
March 24, 2014 at 12:34 pm

A view into a sewer from a glass-bottomed boat.

Heh. A theme for a Josh cartoon? Skipper Steve McIntyre in a HazMat suit navigating his boat through the stench-filled University of Western Australia?

Swiss Bob

It does of course make complete sense in the modern world.
An ethics department that knows nothing about ethics.

Evan Jones

Too funny. No wonder these guys think we-all are conspiring against them. Projection much? #B^)
Yet it must be nice to have a tame ethics committee at your disposal. In these litigious times, you never know when you may need one. Anyone know where I can pick one up? Ebay, maybe?

Marcos
Justthinkin

Morals…the set of principles in me that tells me it is not all right to have an affair with my son’s wife.
Ethics….the set of man-made principles that say it is not all right to have an affair with my son’s wife if there is a chance of getting caught.

Doug UK

Bristol University must be wondering what the hell it has done……………………..

Johna Till Johnson

As I noted over at CA…. To paraphrase the late, great, Leona Helmsley… “Ethics are for the little people”. Perhaps UWA needs a new motto….

Colorado Wellington

Justthinkin says:
March 24, 2014 at 1:20 pm

Ethics….the set of man-made principles that say it is not all right to have an affair with my son’s wife if there is a chance of getting caught.

From reading the UWA paper trail it’s more like it is not all right to have an affair with my son’s wife if I can ghost-write a letter for my son to sign stating that he’s fine with me having an affair with her because he previously agreed that I can take her and the kids to an amusement park and this is all well within the scope of the original approval.
Or something like that. Not being a real UWA ethicist I’m just making it up as I go.

What makes Lewandowsky’s approach any different than his friends in silk jackets? Moral decay is the killer of ethics.

Lew’s silly effort reeks of ad hominem, irregardless of everything else.

pokerguy

“Too funny. No wonder these guys think we-all are conspiring against them. Projection much?”
****
Comment of the day. Too funny indeed.

Colorado Wellington

… oh, and keeping in mind the university’s broader interdependencies I will also work with my son to make sure that his boyfriend’s mother doesn’t find out about any of this and stop financially supporting our family’s drug use.

KNR

Doug UK s Bristol University must be wondering what the hell it has done…
yes but can you imagine how easy a life his students have , the rubbish they must get away with in their work in their attempts to keep up with his ‘standards ‘

Theo Goodwin

“However, these conclusions were not written by a university investigation or university official but by Lewandowsky himself and simply transferred to university letterhead by UWA Deputy Vice Chancellor Robyn Owens within minutes after Lewandowsky had sent her language that was acceptable to him.”
So, Owens lied on behalf of Lewandowsky or he lied to her and the result appeared on a formal document issued by the university. Strikes me as a pretty serious matter.

Nigel S

A Marxist conspiracy
“Those are my principles, and if you don’t like them… well, I have others.”
Groucho Marx

Ursus Augustus

Now we see the true nature of the Lewny’s ethics, his honestry, his obsession. He is not just a garden variety fraud IMO but can bow be classified under the recently devolved species of fundamentalist nut job, an “ecoli-er” which seems to be to academia what golden staph is to hospitals.

Oldseadog

Seems as if Loo ( sorry, Lew) is on a bit of a paper roll at the moment.
(Sorry Josh.)

charles nelson

I have several friends who are academics and have given me vivid accounts of the sycophancy, treachery, bullying, gossiping and backstabbing that characterise the social setting of most university departments.
Although he’s not the sharpest tool in the box, deep down Lew knows that everyone in his academic circle is feasting on the detail in Steve’s pieces. They’re reading about the poor quality of the work, his little tricks and deceptions….discussing it amongst themselves smiling benignly and saying nothing when they meet Lew’s gaze.
Imagine being Lew.
I’m betting that right now he wishes that he’d never met Cookie.

ROM

rogerknights says:
March 24, 2014 at 12:34 pm
“A view into a [ an ivory towered, academic ] sewer from a glass-bottomed boat”.
____________________
What a very apt metaphor for what is increasingly being seen by the public who are forced to pay for the contents of the academic sewer as now being the norm for much of ivory towered academia and climate science today.
My complete contempt for what was once one of the most respected institutions of our world of the past, those great University centres of learning and knowledge is rapidly being reinforced by an increasing number of revelations of quite marked academic corruption and power wielding by the new emerging phenomena of a powerful, increasingly corrupt and manipulative academic Mafiosa, secure in their carefully protected havens of the ivory towered universities.
Those newly emerged academic Mafiosa have all the traits of the real world mafiosa with their control of so much of the science of the universities, the ruthless elimination and neutering of any alternatives or opposition at any level to their agendas, the quite deliberate manipulation of the political system, the quite marked and arrogantly open grasping of as much of the tax payer’s wealth as they can achieve, the endless pursuit for ever more power and influence and the total contempt for the little people out there on the streets and factories and farms who they have come to believe are merely there to do their bidding and to endlessly pay for the ivory tower protected academic Mafiosa’s agenda’s and salubrious life styles.

Truth Disciple

Justthinkin you are a perv. What’s she look like?

Gary Hladik

Colorado Wellington says (March 24, 2014 at 1:46 pm): “Or something like that. Not being a real UWA ethicist I’m just making it up as I go.”
Um, how is that different from a “real” UWA ethicist? 🙂

“take a look at how arstechnica is spinning the papers retraction: http://arstechnica.com/science/2014/03/journal-pulls-paper-due-to-legal-context-created-by-climate-contrarians/
Boy they are in high dudgeon over there. As best I can determine:
– All climate skeptics are nuts.
– It is *impossible* to do poor science when your work is alarmist.
– Rational thinking is verboten. See the first two statements above.
– Any insult of a skeptic is OK, since they are ALL agents of big oil, big phama, Monsanto, et al.
– And ANY response to an insult-such-as-Lew-paper verifies the nuttiness of the skeptic.
Completely absent from the ArsTechnica paper and discussion is the fact that the research is wholly bogus. But never let science and facts get in the way of religion …. for the CAUSE. I guess I’d be an alarmist also if someone could convince me that there is one whiff of ‘science’ behind the alarm. Until that time, I’ll get my marching orders from Steve McIntyre and WUWT. I, of course, can’t think for myself. Because I’m nuts. Or so Lew says …

DCA

Top post @ sks.
“Climate Science Legal Defense Fund Needs Your Help!”
The boys are running in fear.

more soylent green!

Post Normal Ethics?

clipe

Today’s note pertains only to the ethics approval of Hoax. The circumstances surrounding the ethics application for Fury are much worse and will be discussed separately.

This is better than Cornation Street

Streetcred

March 24, 2014 at 2:12 pm |Theo Goodwin says:

So, Owens lied on behalf of Lewandowsky or he lied to her and the result appeared on a formal document issued by the university. Strikes me as a pretty serious matter.

Looks like the resignation of Owens is in order.

Colorado Wellington

Gary Hladik says:
March 24, 2014 at 3:04 pm

Colorado Wellington says (March 24, 2014 at 1:46 pm): “Or something like that. Not being a real UWA ethicist I’m just making it up as I go.”

Um, how is that different from a “real” UWA ethicist? 🙂

They get paid for the rot.

George Daddis

The Mann principle:
If it brings in more $ and publicity to the University, it is beyond criticism.

Skiphil

Please, don’t anyone dare call Stephan Lewandowsky “the Jerry Sandusky of climate psychology”
… and don’t call any of UWA’s miscreant officials “the Graham Spanier of university administration”
Most definitely do not come up with any “State Pen” type demeaning jokes about the esteemed, distinguished “University of Western Australia” …. perhaps “University for Weak-minded Australians” (no offense intended for Australians with healthy ethical standards)

Theo Goodwin

ROM says:
March 24, 2014 at 2:54 pm
Very well said. The Mafia just might offer the organizational blueprint for the future. It would differ from the Mafia because it would control thought in addition to behavior.

RoyFOMR

Repost from a comment I made at BishopHill:
Just checked Dana 97% Guardian blog thread where he,and his good buddies are pushing the line that Dr Lew was ethically sound, factually perfect but let down by cowardly journalists.
There’s two posts (PythMontagne -23rd March 23:51and UnripeWatermelon -21:51) pointing out the SMc post.
What’s the bet that these posts will fall foul of Community rules?
For posterity:PythMontagne
24 Mar 2014 23:51
1
2
Guardian Pick
McIntyre just dropped another bomb on Lewandowsky and it’s a beaut:
http://climateaudit.org/2014/03/24/lewandowsky-ghost-wrote-conclusions-of-uwa-ethics-investigation-into-hoax/
Report
UnripeWatermelon
24 Mar 2014 21:51
4
5
Guardian Pick
Here’s an update – Lewandowsky Ghost-wrote Conclusions of UWA Ethics Investigation into “Hoax”.
You’re never going to convince the general pulic by lying and fudging the data all the time. It’s no wonder why scepticism is constantly increasing and “global warming” is considered a non-issue
==========
Place your bets now, Ladies and Gentlemen.
Here’s the link for WUWT readers. Select Newest Replies first:
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/climate-consensus-97-per-cent/2014/mar/21/contrarians-bully-climate-change-journal-retraction#comments

Skiphil

Ethics????
Integrity????
Peter Gleick, Michael Mann, Stephan Lewandowsky, Phil Jones, Lord Oxburgh, Muir Russell, John Cook, Graham Spanier, et al.
etc. etc. etc.
Can there be any descent into shameless self-aggrandizing ***deceit*** which will shock the consciences of their fellow Alarmists??
Is there anything out of bounds for such people???
When will their fervent allies begin to realize that such charlatans are indeed bad for “The Cause”???

Skiphil

Perhaps Bristol University can raise funds to create the Peter Gleick Distinguished Chair in Climate Ethics.
Lewandowsky can be the first to hold this position.
Ironically, Bristol leads its website with this statement:

“The University is internationally renowned, ranked in the top 30 universities globally (QS World University Rankings), due to its outstanding teaching and research, its superb facilities and highly talented students and staff.”

Tip-top research university, but they forgot to mention ethics and integrity, so all is well.

jones

Nigel S
You made me splutter my tea over the keyboard…..
Ta….

Ahhh, Lew’sky, Lew’sky, Lew’sky . . . .
. . . pretty soon the only place you will be welcomed is at the AGU . . .
John

hunter

Peter Gleick did at least as much sleazy stuff, admitted to it and got promoted for his sleaziness, since it was in the cause of AGW hype.
This latest bit low class Lew’s behavior may get him an endowed seat at some school seeking to make it clear that they are on the side of the most extreme positions on AGW currently available.

more soylent green! says:
March 24, 2014 at 4:28 pm
“Post Normal Ethics?”
Yes indeed.
In a well “diversified” organization, Each “diverse” individual comes with his own, relative version of ethics.
In “post-modern” (post-normal) times groups need only be diverse.
If not diverse, the group is immoral and unethical. Their product is tainted already.
Any groups’ behavior and output are justified and qualified by diversity alone.
Ethics are an anachronism,
There’s no longer a place for these relativistic ideas in a post-modern, diverse world. (loony farm)

Clay Marley

It appears no one at the university have any morals with any basis, so just what is the point of having an ethics policy? If the policy reflected the truth it would simply state “The end justifies the means.”
There is also a moral value that leftists lack, which says policy documents, and constitutions for that matter, have meaning and value. In reality they are seen as fiat documents. Like fiat currency, they have only whatever value they think they have at that moment.

KenB

I am profoundly ashamed of the Australian officials that have involved themselves in this deception and travesty. I wish to publically disassociate myself due the lowest of low ethical standards connived under the name of the University of Western Australia.
Shame, shame, and my earnest hope that those involved will be called to account, otherwise ethics and this University becomes just another convenient casualty in a path of lies and deceit that is bringing down the good name of Science and the scientific method.

rogerknights

Lewdoscience

rogerknights

This whitewash’s dirty laundry reveals, to a social psychologist, a knee-jerk us-vs-them mindset, plus a slipshod and overweening arrogance. This mindset seems to be general throughout academia and “mainstream” climatology (e.g., see the stonewalling by a college in Albany, NY in defense of one of its employees who apparently fudged UHI data). In light of this revelation, it is easier to discount the “findings” of other whitewashes, such as those of the Team and Mann in Britain and the US, as similar instances of naughty-haughtiness.

Cold in Wisconsin

The only ethics that they need follow, indeed that they recognize as valid is “the end justifies the means.” That is always the way with true crusaders. The pity is that it is so entrenched in every discipline from sports to business to government, and of course even religion, that the public rarely objects.

William McClenney

We Tarzan! Lew CHEATah!

NikFromNYC

More and more legal ammo is being now freely handed to skeptics as the debate starts to play out in real courts of law and real official inquires by governments that include 50% opposition to contemporary corrupt leftism. Mark Steyn just hired a team of new lawyers now that he has rejected the pacifism of The New Republic magazine:
http://www.steynonline.com/6201/what-kind-of-fool-am-i
A pattern of bumbling deception that has been defended instead of rooted out by mainstream climate “science” is a great gift to the upcoming skeptical legal argument, though the American Physical society may pull the plug on the whole mess first. Such Peter Gleick and Marcott 2013 moments are exactly why they are feeling the heat.