Lewandowsky, Cook claim 78,000 skeptics could see conspiracy survey at Cooks site where there is no link
FOI documents obtained by Simon Turnill show that
Cook didn’t post the link at all, he tweeted it (how many people were on his twitter list in 2010?). You might think this is a minor change, but not at all. Cook’s tweet probably didn’t get the “390,000 visits” his site might have got that month. Instead the records show he got five retweets.
More importantly, above all else, Cook has been untruthful with his readers and with skeptics all along.
There is much on the site about this dishonesty and how they roll than the one quote I leave from Steve McIntyre.
Steve McIntyre asked Cook to explain:
Quote:Not to put too fine a point on it, it appears to me that you lied, when you asserted that your correspondence with Lewandowsky on 28 August 2010 was “forensic evidence” that showed that you had posted a link at Skeptical Science to the Lewandowsky survey on that day. I use the word “lie” because you had clearly examined the 28 August 2010 correspondence at the time of your email to Chambers and knew that this correspondence did not show that you had posted a link at Skeptical Science to the Lewandowsky survey on 28 August 2010 or any other day.
Before I make any public statements about this matter, I am offering you an opportunity to rebut the belief that the statement bolded above was a lie.
Cook did not respond.
http://joannenova.com.au/2013/03/lewandowsky-cook-claim-78000-skeptics-could-see...
Forum
Pages: 1
Skeptical Science no better than town drunk (Read 562 times)
