Lewandowsky on Radio 4 – missing out basic human psychology

Mike Haseler comments upon the appearance of Prof Stephan Lewandowsky on Radio 4 this week. Lewandowski is a nasty piece of work who set out to fabricate data using bogus questions by which he attempted to prove sceptics are conspiracy theorists. All he managed to prove is that he is incapable of admitting the poor quality of his […]

Stephan Lewandowsky on Hurricane Sandy

Jo Nova posts on Stephan Lewandowsky’s analysis of Hurricane Sandy. Below is my comment, with the relevant links. Lewandowsky has a lot to say about the overwhelming evidence for smoking causing lung cancer, but in substance has just this to say about the impending catastrophic global warming. Trends such as the tripling of the number of weather-related […]

Lewandowsky et al 2012 from two alternative philosophies of science

The following comment was made on Joanne Nova’s blog, in response to a comment by Jonathan Fordsham that Stephen Lewandowsky did not know what he was getting into by publishing his paper and the subsequent defence of that paper. Whilst Lewandowsky may not have known what he was getting into, the aim of the paper […]

The Role of Pivot Tables in Understanding Lewandowsky, Oberauer & Gignac 2012

Summary Descriptive statistics, particularly in the form of pivot tables enable a bridging of the gap between the public pronouncements and the high level statistical analysis that can only be performed by specialists. In empirically-based scientific papers, data analysis by spread sheet enables the robust questions to be asked by the non-specialist and the expert […]

A Reply to Lewandowsky’s sideswipe

In looking analysing the data on the Lew et al paper I made the following comment. If you sample some of their articles, you will find a dogmatic defence of climate change, and blocking, editing or denigration views that are contrary to their own. The claim in the paper that they contacted five sceptical blogs […]

Lewandowsky et al. 2012 MOTIVATED REJECTION OF SCIENCE – Part 5 the Missing Links

Jo Nova has now provided the first full list of the survey questions used for the Lewandowsky, Oberauer & Gignac paper, along with a well-written summary. However, there are a number of elements that need to be emphasised If “climate denial” is on a par with “holocaust” or “smoking” denial, why not start by referencing […]

Lewandowsky et al. 2012 MOTIVATED REJECTION OF SCIENCE – Part 4 Political Opinions

This is the fourth in a series on Lewandowsky, Oberauer & Gignac – NASA faked the moon landing:Therefore (Climate) Science is a Hoax: An Anatomy of the Motivated Rejection of Science (in press, Psychological Science). This posting is further analysis of the data set sourced by Katabasis. (The data is now available from Bishop Hill) The previous post […]

Lewandowsky et al. 2012 MOTIVATED REJECTION OF SCIENCE – Part 3 Data Analysis of the Conspiracy Theory element

A month ago made two postings on the paper Lewandowsky, Oberauer & Gignac – NASA faked the moon landing:Therefore (Climate) Science is a Hoax: An Anatomy of the Motivated Rejection of Science (in press, Psychological Science). In the first I showed that an opening statement about the beliefs of climate scientists was not supported by the references. The […]

Lewandowsky et al 2012 – Data Analysis part 1

Katabasis offered in the comments at Jo Nova’s blog to provide the raw data for the paper “NASA faked the moon landing  — Therefore (Climate) Science is a Hoax: An Anatomy of the Motivated Rejection of Science”   Lewandowsky, S., Oberauer, K., & Gignac, C. E. (in press) Psychological Science I took Katabasis up on the […]

Lewandowsky et al. 2012 MOTIVATED REJECTION OF SCIENCE – Part 2

This post was based on the belief that the survey I took in June was the one used in the paper. I realize now this is not the case. The one I took at “Watching the Deniers” is a development of the 2010 survey. There are less questions on conspiracy theories (but “NASA faked the […]