Anatomy of a Dupe - the John Locke Foundation

Sat, 2007-11-10 10:35Kevin Grandia
Kevin Grandia's picture

Anatomy of a Dupe - the John Locke Foundation

Someone over at Daily Kos found a cached version of one of the bloggers duped by the “Geoclimatic Journal” hoax.

Seems that the fine folks at Environment NC - a blog set up by the ultra right-wing so-called “John Locke Foundation” were willing to write some pretty glowing reviews of this fake study.

In referring to the “blockbuster” study, Roy Cordato, a “resident scholar” at the John Locke Society wrote:

Clearly this study from the latest issue of Journal of Geoclimatic Studies by four climate scientists–two from the Dept. of Climatology at the University of Arizona and two from the Department of Atmospheric Physics, University of Gothenburg, Sweden, should be the lead story on the eveing news tonight. But it is more than likely that it won’t even be mentioned. the paper abstract speaks for itself.”

Amazing, for a group pushing so hard for “sound science” they sure are willing to blindly report fake science. Embarrasing to say the least, not to mention a great illustration of the hypocrisy of the climate denial industry.

Hat tip as well to the fine work being done by Adam at Energy Smart blog.

Previous Comments

This post was up for under 5 minutes before it was taken down. I think Dan rather still hasn’t acknowledged that he was duped.

Nice red herring Roy, we’re talking about your blog, which is described on your site as: “Advancing Sound Science,” and

“Contributors to Environment NC have advanced degrees and expertise in areas such as science, public policy, economics, and the law. We share a common belief that environmental and resource management policy too often lacks a basis in sound science or economics and simply serves to further the agenda of ideologues.”

What this “hoax” shows is just how little convincing it takes for some to tout the real “junk science” – organizations like yours are willing to ignore reams and reams of scientific evidence from organizations like NASA, and the American Academy of Science, yet any teeny, tiny shred of evidence fitting your ideology is instantly give the status of “blockbuster.”

Sound science indeed. 

Yes, they were “duped” – for all of five minutes.

And since you are trying to make hay out of how little it takes to fool some people, you may want to examine your own beliefs. What you accuse Roy and anyone else who doesn’t unquestioningly swallow your dogma of, can easily be applied to you – in spades.

The difference, Rob, is that you don’t have the science on your side.

And for those five minutes they took it, hook, line and sinker.
I love it!
Rob, you’re all keyboard and no brains…

I’ve been having my own little battle with Rob over the last few days, and I have come to the conclusion that he should be ignored wherever he pops up. Resist the urge, folks. Let him blether on. All that happens when we take the bait is that he gets air time.

RIP Rob…

I don’t know how many times you’ve declared you think I should be ignored. No sooner do you make your empty resolution, whereupon at the first opportunity you immediatly post one of your witless comments in response to me.

Perhaps you should consider taking your own advice, though based on previous experience, I doubt that will happen any time soon.

Good advice Femack. I think we’d all be better off ignoring him.

Let the folks who run the site address his more obvious attempts at disinformation, but the rest of us would do well to leave him alone.

DON’T FEED the TROLLS!

So they read it, wrote up their post, posted it, and unposted it all in the span of 5 minutes. Sure. Sure they did.

Keeping in mind that even if they did, 5 minutes is 5 minutes too long. This is a light switch thing, yes or no, fooled or not.

It amazes me how much attention a blog post has drawn that was up for such a short period of time that the only way anyone could ever see it was through a cached google search. As the administrator of environmentnc.com, please allow me to be the first to endow with the shocking revelation that our contributors, like the science they debate, are not completely perfect and infallible beings 100% of the time, although our site’s critics apparently are.

Anyone is free to leave comments on our site and debate the science as you like…so please do. I only ask that the discourse remain level-headed and avoid ad hominem attacks, as I do monitor the comments that are made.

You may also want to review my post on our site regarding this unfortunate (albeit overblown to illogical proportions) incident: http://www.environmentnc.com/?p=318

Wow, they’re right up there with Rush Limbaugh.

http://www.historycommons.org/context.jsp?item=global_warming_tmln_167#global_warming_tmln_167

I particularly like how Limbaugh, as the “warnee”, was able to get Dr. Roy Spencer, who warned him of the hoax, to apologize for not warning him forcefully enough.

Incidentally, in this post, the link for the JGS paper is broken. It can be found here: http://www.globalwarminghoax.com/downloads/Journal_of_Geoclimatic_Studies_2007_23.pdf

[x]

This is a guest post by David Suzuki.

The Amazon rainforest is magnificent. Watching programs about it, we’re amazed by brilliant parrots and toucans, tapirs, anacondas and jaguars. But if you ever go there expecting to be overwhelmed by a dazzling blur of activity, you’ll be disappointed. The jungle has plenty of vegetation — hanging vines, enormous trees, bromeliads and more — and a cacophony of insects and frogs. But much of the activity goes on at night or high up in the canopy.

Films of tropical forests don’t accurately reflect the reality of the ecosystems....

read more