Lewandowsky's data

Geoff Chambers has obtained Stephan Lewandowsky's survey data which can be seen as an attachment at the bottom of this post. Of course it's anonymised, so we are not going to get to the bottom of the question of the number of sceptics he approached, but you may be interested.

Lewandowsky data

Comments

[omnologos]

Paul - it's worse than we thought!

As I noted elsewhere, recently the half-life of alarmist 'scientific' papers has come down dramatically. Years ago it would take many months for MBH98 to be countered. Then we went down to a few weeks (Steig et al), and finally days (Gergis et al).

It appears that Lew's has now been shredded even before seeing itself in print!

At this rate, alarmism will soon self-debunk in a few Planck time units. Not sure anybody will mind such a sad loss.

[The Leopard In The Basement]

I give Geoff full credit for politeness :)

I love that Tom now announces loftily:

A (hopefully) final comment on Lewandowski (in press):

Old Tom thinks his is, and should be, the last word on this when he is just echoing with (wilful?) ignorance work done by more diligent and better motivated people. I don't think Tom should really be the one to say when the real analysis has started let alone ended ;)

[Foxgoose]

Foxgoose
Hey! If we're going to get a proper crosstalk act together, we need to do something about our timing.
Sep 3, 2012 at 9:39 AM geoffchambers

Sorry Geoff - a touch of premature exultation I'm afraid ;-(

[ROM]

A poster of the forum i generally frequent and a skeptic tried his hand at Lewandowsky's survey on August 29th 2010.
He gave up about half way through when he just got totally disgusted with the type of questions being asked

In a pdf presentation by Lewandowsky [The Psychology of Climate Change Communication and “Skepticism”]
[http://www.monash.edu.au/research/sustainability-institute/assets/documents/seminars/msi-seminar_10-09-23_lewandowsky_presentation.pdf ]
which reads like the author has imbibed illicit substances for a little to long, is dated Sept 2010,

Slide 19 of the presentation says;

Lewandowsky & Gignac
[ forthcoming ]
internet survey [ N=1100 ]
Endorsement of climate conspiracy [ etc ]
Conspiracy factor "without climate item" predicts rejection of climate science
___

This slide gives every impression that with only a couple of weeks between the end of the survey,say at the end of august 2010 but depending on it's end date and the creation of the number of slides in the link above in September 2010 immediately following, that the results of the survey were already a foregone pre-ordained result of which the survey was only to give it the appearance of legitimacy.

And Lewandowsky's claimed result from the survey that free marketers believe in conspiracies and reject climate science has it's corollary of course.
And that is that communists, rabid socialists and Stalinists believe in CAGW climate science.

[ROM]

Sorry. My bad! I should have included the blog site for that skeptic poster's attempts at the survey.

Deltoid [ http://scienceblogs.com/deltoid/2010/08/29/survey-on-attitudes-towards-cl/ ]

"Stephan Lewandowsky is conducting a survey on attitudes towards climate science and related issues and is interested in responses from readers of pro-science blogs. Go [here](http://www.kwiksurveys.com/online-survey.php?surveyID=HKMKNF_991e2415) if you are interested."

[Richard Drake]

Leopard:

I'm a fundamentalist bore when it comes to anything smelling of conspiracy theory (probably to my detriment sometimes) and just don't pay attention to even to ask a why question most the time. I only see a missed opportunity to see the original figures here.

Good comment. There's much I'd love to discuss on the back of this but now doesn't seem the time. Now's the time to shut down - through formal complaint and outright ridicule - as many as possible of the crackpot theories the warmists have tenderly nursed for many years, energised by the sterling work here of many, not least yourself, ManicB and Geoff Chambers.