The OTHER problem with the Lewandowsky paper and similar ‘skeptic’ motivation analysis: Core premise off the rails about fossil fuel industry corruption accusation | Watts Up With That?

And Gelbspan, as I’ve pointed out earlier, has never proven he has any evidence to support his accusation that skeptic scientists are paid to manufacture doubt about man-caused global warming.

It certainly appears that what we have instead is around two decades of efforts by enviro-activists to manufacture doubt about the credibility of the skeptics. So, how many more attempts to smear skeptics can be thrown on this pile before the whole thing collapses?

Lewandowsky was warned his survey was no good | Herald Sun Andrew Bolt Blog

We’ve already noted evidence strongly suggesting the credulous Lewandowsky was fed fake data by fake sceptics, thanks to a sloppily designed survey.

Now, as Steve McIntyre shows, Lewandowsky’s team was actually warned of this very weakness in his survey, yet decided to remove one method of preventing it being corrupted by frauds.

The man who warned them was Professor Roger Pielke Jr, who Lewandowsky’s team wrongly identified as a sceptic

Twitter / BigJoeBastardi: No fiesta de warmingista as ...

No fiesta de warmingista as this pattern evolves.SST analog winter forecast has cold for US this year similar to 09-10 pic.twitter.com/B1Q35Pom