= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
passive_fist comments on Open thread, Sep. 28 - Oct. 4, 2015 - Less Wrong Discussion
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
Comments (198)
http://www.nature.com/articles/srep16784
Lewandowsky has an... interesting reputation.
If there's something wrong with the article, it seems like you should be able to say what it is rather than making insinuations about one of its authors.
(Lewandowsky is strongly disliked by those whose position on global warming differs from the mainstream scientific consensus, no doubt. So far as I can tell he doesn't have a reputation for dishonesty or incompetence among groups without a strong motivation to put him down.)
I haven't read the article, just glanced at the front page, saw the name of the lead author and thought "Hmm... that name looks familiar".