A disturbance in the farce: Another hateful and pointless paper from Stephan Lewandowsky and Naomi Oreskes

Lewpaper, version 3.0, now with even more rhetoric. One wonders if the University of Bristol has any shame. Barry Woods has an excellent comment that follows, pointing out how this is as much about their fear of ‘the pause’, as it is the hatred of opinion that is contrary to their viewpoint. As is typical…

Advertisements

Finally: peer reviewed pushback against the Lewandowsky, Oberauer, and Gignac paper

Paul Matthews writes: Ruth Dixon and Jonathan Jones have had a comment published in Psychological Science criticising the LOG ‘Moon hoax’ paper (Psych Science) and LGO ‘Role of Conspiracist Ideation’ (PlosOne) http://pss.sagepub.com/content/early/2015/03/26/0956797614566469.full “Reanalysis of the survey data sets of Lewandowsky, Oberauer, and Gignac (2013) and Lewandowsky, Gignac, and Oberauer (2013) indicates that the conclusions of…

32,757 year old survey participant skews Lewandowsky paper – Defective data, demonstrably defective conclusion

Guest essay by Eric Worrall. JoNova reports on a hilarious error in Lewandowsky’s paper “The Role of Conspiracist Ideation and Worldviews in Predicting Rejection of Science” . The calculated age of survey respondents has reportedly been skewed by one “outlier” who claimed to have been born in the palaeolithic, 32,757 years ago. Raw data –…

More insane conspiracy theory from Dr. Stephan Lewandowsky of Bristol University

A new paper by Stephan Lewandowsky once again projects his own conspiracy ideation onto skeptics Extract: One known element of conspiratorial thinking is its ‘self-sealing’ quality (Keeley 1999, Bale 2007, Sunstein and Vermeule 2009), whereby evidence against a conspiratorial belief is re-interpreted as evidence for that belief. In the case of ‘climategate’, this self-sealing nature…

Somebody in psychology finally 'gets it' about Stephan Lewandowsky and John Cook and their 'smear science'

Social psychologist Jose Duarte pulls no punches in describing Lewandowsky’s failures of science in the “Moon Hoax” paper and the later retracted “Fury” paper. And then goes on to describe failure in Cook’s 97% consensus paper. Excerpts follow. in their abstract they say: “Endorsement of free markets also predicted the rejection of other established scientific…

More on the Lewandowsky and Oreskes Co-Authored Paper Risbey et al. (2014)

In this post, we’ll discuss more inconsistencies in the recently published paper Risbey et al. (2014). These are major flaws in the paper…above and beyond the faults and curiosities discussed in the last post. As you’ll recall, that paper–about climate model portrayals of ENSO and about modeled versus observed global surface temperature trends–was curiously co-authored…