Geoscience Reference
In-Depth Information
that were virulently anti-sceptic. It's like trying to discover what Jews think, but only
interviewing people in Gaza.
In the end, they got only ten anonymous responses from people who said they believed
the moon-landing was faked, and only four of those also claimed to be sceptics. Based on
thisnano-fragmentofreality,theteamimmediately issuedpressreleasesdeclaringsceptics
were more likely to believe the moon landing was faked. Careful investigative journalists
swallowed the story whole and it was published in the great masthead
The Guardian
.
It took the researchers another seven or eight months to actually check, correct and
review their work and get it published. (Lucky no one believes anything they read in the
mainstream media, isn't it?) Naturally, scientists everywhere protested at the statistical
incompetence and inept design. In response, the same team of psychologists diagnosed
those making the complaints as suffering from various forms of 'conspiracy ideation'.
They published their online diagnoses in a second paper, 'Recursive Fury,' which was so
hopelessly ethically and scientifically compromised that it was removed from the journal's
site within weeks, and officially retracted completely a year later.
58
Was the point of this research to advance human knowledge or to advance a cause?
Carbon dioxide is not a dangerous pollutant, not unless you measure ground
temperatures in car parks, and tropospheric temperatures with wind gauges. In the absence
of better information, based on what we have, the simplest explanation is that man-made
greenhouse gases have minor warming effects.
