José Duarte, PhD

Category: scientific fraud

  • Correction / counting

    —

    in ,

    Correction: In one of my posts on the Cook fraud, I listed 19 social science, survey, marketing, and opinion papers that were coded as “climate papers” endorsing of anthropogenic warming. I made a mistake listing this one: Vandenplas, P. E. 1998. “Reflections on the Past and Future of Fusion and Plasma Physics Research.” Plasma Physics…

  • All sides

    —

    in

    A few days ago on Twitter I said that climate skeptics needed to distance themselves from the conspiracy theorists and harassers. This upset a dozen or so climate skeptics and led to a flurry of rebukes that I had trouble following due to their sheer volume and the constraints of a 140-character medium. I can’t coherently…

  • On fraud

    —

    in , ,

    I’ve never had to think about scientific fraud until the last few months. It’s been an interesting journey. I’ve got a paper coming soon that focuses on this issue. I’m of two minds about the need to think about it. It raises interesting ethical and epistemological questions, and I’m deeply interested in both ethics and…

  • How one paleo-participant can change the outcome of a study

    —

    in , ,

    Lewandowsky, Gignac, and Oberauer (2013) authored “The Role of Conspiracist Ideation and Worldviews in Predicting Rejection of Science” in PLOS ONE. (Paper here.) This study has many of the same features as their Psychological Science scam. In that study, they falsely linked belief in the moon-landing hoax to climate skepticism when in fact only three participants…

  • No results

    —

    in , ,

    A colleague perused the the Cook rater forums and sent me this example: “I got one last night, though, that I thought was funny – I rated it as “Explicit >50%”, because it *was* attributing all the warming to human GHG emissions.  It just claimed there wouldn’t *be* much warming, asserting that the IPCC had…

  • The art of evasion

    —

    in , ,

    Here’s an update on the Cook 97% scam. They apparently have no answers. Cook and some of his crew had a chat event at Reddit. Last I checked, they never addressed any substantive issues in the report, even though various people asked them about it. They don’t argue against the fraud reports, the validity issues,…

  • Cooking stove use, housing associations, white males, and the 97%

    —

    in , ,

    The Cook et al. (2013) 97% paper included a bunch of psychology studies, marketing papers, and surveys of the general public as scientific endorsement of anthropogenic climate change. Let’s walk through that sentence again. The Cook et al 97% paper included a bunch of psychology studies, marketing papers, and surveys of the general public as scientific…

  • More scams

    —

    in , ,

    Lewandowsky, S., Oberauer, K., & Gignac, G. E. (2013), titled their paper thusly: NASA faked the moon landing—therefore, (climate) science is a hoax: an anatomy of the motivated rejection of science. And in their abstract they say: “Endorsement of free markets also predicted the rejection of other established scientific findings, such as the facts that HIV…

  • Lewandowsky fraud

    —

    in , ,

    What a summer. I’ve also called for the retraction of the following paper: Lewandowsky, Stephan, Klaus Oberauer, and Gilles E. Gignac. 2013. “NASA Faked the Moon Landing—Therefore, (Climate) Science Is a Hoax: An Anatomy of the Motivated Rejection of Science.” Psychological Science 24 (5): 622–33. (Link) The title draws a link between belief in the…