Science Study Chaff



Jerry took note of this (note fun video above).

Global warming is such a hot topic that people apparently spoof studies for their own purposes. The story linked here describes the tale of one such spoof:

On Nov. 7, news flashed around conservative and climate-skeptic e-mail chains, some Web sites and a couple of talk-radio programs that an important new scientific paper proved that undersea bacteria, not people, were responsible for most of the recent buildup of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere.

The trigger was an e-mail chain maintained by Benny J. Peiser, a British social scientist who sends out daily summaries of research questioning dangerous human-caused global warming and international climate treaties, along with other subjects.
This message merited designation as an “Extra,” and had the title “Carbon dioxide production by benthic bacteria: the death of manmade global warming theory?” It cited a new paper in the Journal of Geoclimatic Studies.

It provided a link (no longer active) to a long, equation-laden treatise in that Japanese journal, written by researchers at the University of Arizona and University of Gothenburg, in Sweden.

...But some climate experts almost instantly smelled something fishy, with Roger A. Pielke Jr. of the University of Colorado quickly posting, “Call me a skeptic skeptic - I smell a hoax.”

Just 70 minutes after the first e-mail message from Mr. Peiser, he sent out another one with the headline “hoax alert,” saying, “There is no Department of Climatology at the University of Arizona, nor is there a Daniel Klein or Mandeep Gupta in the U. of A. directory. Neither is there an Institute of Geoclimatic Studies. The whole thing looks like a nice hoax.”

In this case, discovery was quick - there is no Department of Climatology at the University of Arizona - but it takes time to shoot these things down. Really well-designed hoaxes might prove particularly vexing. And the apparent purpose of this spoof?:

Its purpose was to expose the credulity and scientific illiteracy of many of the people who call themselves climate sceptics. While dismissive of the work of the great majority of climate scientists, they will believe almost anything if it lends support to their position. Their approach to climate science is the opposite of scepticism.

Too much trouble for everyone. Studies that are not in earnest are all spam in the cerebral cortex: the equivalent of viruses and worms!