Tag Archives: lewandowsky

Lewandowsky’s Backdating

In today’s post, I want to discuss Lewandowsky’s backdating of the blogpost in which he purported to “out” four skeptics, a claim that he re-iterated and embellished in a subsequent academic article, Lewandowsky et al (Fury). In response to a recent FOI request by Simon Turnill, the University of Western Australia stated that, based on […]

Cook’s Survey

John Cook, whose crush on Lewandowsky continues unabated, asked various blogs, including Climat Audit, to direct readers to another online survey. Lucia has discussed the survey here. The links to the survey from SKS here is http://survey.gci.uq.edu.au/survey.php?c=1R9YT8YMZTWF and from Rabett hereis http://survey.gci.uq.edu.au/survey.php?c=II7WP4R4VRU7. More IDs are available at Lucia’s. It is easy enough to access both […]

Tom Curtis Writes

While CA readers may disagree with Tom Curtis, we’ve also noticed that he is straightforward. Recently, in comments responding to my recent post on misrepresentations by Lewandowsky and Cook, Curtis agreed that “Lewandowsky’s new addition to his paper is silly beyond belief”, but argued that “the FOI data does not show Cook to have lied […]

Lewandowsky Doubles Down

Last fall, Geoff Chambers and Barry Woods established beyond a shadow of a doubt that no blog post linking to the Lewandowsky survey had ever been published at the Skeptical Science (SKS) blog. Chambers reasonably suggested at the time that the authors correct the claim in the article to reflect the lack of any link […]

Lewandowsky and “Hide the Decline”

Ethics bait-and-switcher Stephan Lewandowsky and his sidekick, Klaus Oberauer, have added hide the decline to their repertoire at the University of Western Australia blog. As CA readers are well aware, the Briffa et al 2001 reconstruction, based on 387 tree ring density chronologies, goes down in the latter part of the 20th century – clearly […]

The Lewandowsky Ethics Switch

Lewandowsky had to obtain approval for his survey from the UWA Ethics Committee. Simon Turnill has just received remarkable information on this process through FOI, described in an excellent post here. Documents here. The information showed that Lewandowsky used bait-and-switch. Lewandowsky had obtained approval for a project entitled “Understanding Statistical Trends”. The original proposal had […]

Kahneman Scathes Social Psychologists

Daniel Kahneman, a Nobel laureate, recently wrote a scathing letter about experiments by social psychologists purporting to link social priming to associative memory (h/t reader Fred S). Kahneman described a “storm of doubts” about social priming results, inability to replicate claims and characterized the field as a “train wreck looming” and a “mess”. Kahneman’s letter […]

More Deception in the Lewandowsky Data

As CA readers are aware, the Lewandowsky survey was conducted at stridently anti-skeptic blogs (Deltoid, Tamino etc.) and numerous responses purporting to be from “skeptics” were actually from anti-skeptics fraudulently pretending to be skeptics. To date, most of the focus has been on the fake responses in which respondents, pretending to be “skeptics”, deceptively pretended […]

Conspiracy-Theorist Lewandowsky Tries to Manufacture Doubt

As CA readers are aware, Stephan Lewandowsky of the University of Western Australia recently published an article relying on fraudulent responses at stridently anti-skeptic blogs to yield fake results. In addition, it turns out that Lewandowsky misrepresented explained variances from principal components as explained variances from factor analysis, a very minor peccadillo in comparison. In […]

Lewandowsky’s Fake Correlation

Lewandowsky’s most recent blog post really makes one wonder about the qualifications at the University of West Anglia Western Australia. Lewandowsky commenced his post as follows: The science of statistics is all about differentiating signal from noise. This exercise is far from trivial: Although there is enough computing power in today’s laptops to churn out […]