Readers will be well aware of my views on ‘CO2 being labelled a “climate change villain”‘. A CAGW advocate, instead of complaining about criticism, would be well advised to step back and have a closer look at his science that supposedly supports his views. Rather than criticize the system, or the persons involved, and to address the criticizing material.
Related articles
- Lewandowsky Scratches the Scab (geoffchambers.wordpress.com)
- Mann and Lewandowsky go psychotic on climate skeptics (wattsupwiththat.com)
Inconvenient Truth-Tellers Scott Sleek, Observer.
UPDATE: Another article in Psychological Science claims that critics of Lewandowsky’s work were:
“invited to submit a commentary for publication in Psychological Science, but never acted on that invitation.”
I for one have never been invited to make such a comment, and I’m still waiting… (h/t Geoff in the comments)
Astonishingly, Professor Stephan Lewandowsky appears to have completely forgotten that, being on the staff at the University of Western Australia (UWA), he was paid out of the public purse, contributed to by my (and all other Australians’) taxpayer dollars, and as a consequence must accept that his work is subject the Freedom of Information (FoI) regime in force in Australia.
If he wishes to avoid such scrutiny, he should find a job in the private sector, which is not subject to the same rules, but where he would have to compete in the market for funding for his peculiar…
View original post 1,221 more words
The GOLDEN RULE 