Enviro-fanatics & Science Dishonesty
Find a Conversation
| Fri, 12-19-2003 - 5:12pm |
The last time the book was in the news was when environmentalists ripped it because the Danish Committees on Scientific Dishonesty found that: “Objectively speaking, the publication of the work under consideration is deemed to fall within the concept of scientific dishonesty.â€
Well, now the Committee on Scientific Dishonesty has been judged to have been scientifically dishonest.
"On December 17th, Denmark's Ministry of Science, Technology and Innovation published its own response to the DCSD's finding....The ruling is thrown back to the DCSD with instructions to think again. Among a long list of telling criticisms, the ministry says this: “the DCSD has not documented where has allegedly been biased in his choice of data and in his argumentation, and...the ruling is completely void of argumentation for why the DCSD find that the complainants are right in their criticisms of working methods. It is not sufficient that the criticisms of a researcher's working methods exist; the DCSD must consider the criticisms and take a position on whether or not the criticisms are justified, and why.â€
http://www.economist.com/science/displayStory.cfm?story_id=2299989
Killing Millions to Save the Earth--the DDT Lie
http://www.americandaily.com/item/3612
A major cause of hot air--The Kyoto Lie
http://www.opinion.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2003/12/01/do0102.xml&sSheet=/opinion/2003/12/01/ixopinion.html
