While his “recently published … forthcoming” paper with the headline-grabbing title,
“NASA faked the moon landing -Therefore (Climate) Science is a Hoax: An Anatomy of the Motivated Rejection of Science”
has still not appeared in print, the sorry saga of Australian “cognitive psychologist”, Stephan Lewandowsky continues.
Rather than address any questions about his data and methodology, Lewandowsky is choosing to turn himself into a “highly partial and contrived PR machine”. Just like Michael <how dare you question my hockey-stick> Mann and – as I had noted a few weeks ago – the University of East Anglia’s prince of spinners, Neil Wallis, formerly of the now defunct U.K. tabloid, News of the World.
I’ve lost count of the number of self-serving “revisionist” blog posts Lewandowsky has authored since he began his campaign in self-promotion on Sept. 3, but I believe it may well be eight or nine by now.
Some chap by the name of Doug Bostrom appears to be one of Lewandowsky’s “lead” defenders and boosters.
In one of his latest boosterisms (Bostromisms?!) of Lewandowsky’s “recently published … forthcoming” paper (the “findings” of which have been dutifully “churned” and re-churned since July of this year), Bostrom has invoked a variant of the “10:10 no pressure” post-disaster “defense”: The title, according to Bostrom, was “a joke“.
For the record (in light of recent post-moderation comment-purges in that particular corner of the blogosphere), in response to Lewandowsky’s latest defensive diversionary descent into obfuscation, Carrie N. had posed a reasonable question:
Booster Bostrom jumped to the rescue:
After all this time, the “truth” finally emerges: the title was “a joke”. Amazing. Simply amazing.
So I’m quite sure that being an advocate of brief, clear messages, when communicating “(climate) science” Lewandowsky is busily preparing a press release which he will send to all the media outlets (and anti-skeptic-friendly blogs) that have given his “recently published … forthcoming” paper so much airtime.
No doubt Lewandowsky will request that they to let their readers know that the “title” of his “recently published … forthcoming” paper was “a joke” and (in accordance with the advice inherent in Booster Bostrom’s concluding question) that one should not take him or his paper “too seriously” ;-)
Perhaps in this obviously long overdue press release, Lewandowsky will even include details of the issue of Psychological Science in which his
magnificent obsession opus can/will be found!
At the very least he should get in touch with fellow psychologist, Adam Corner, who was first off the mark to “churn” Lewandowsky’s “recently published … forthcoming” paper in the U.K. Guardian on July 27. Here’s how it was billed:
Are climate sceptics more likely to be conspiracy theorists?
New research finds that sceptics also tend to support conspiracy theories such as the moon landing being faked
Sure looks like the Guardian and/or Corner most definitely did not get “the joke”.