Archives for February, 2005

An astroturf scientific journal

I wrote earlier about how tobacco company documents, released as apart of the Tobacco Settlement Agreement proved that Philip Morris created junkscience.com to argue that environmental tobacco smoke (ETS) was harmless. Those documents also tell the story of how they set up a scientific journal controlled by tobacco-friendly editors so that research finding that ETS…

Miranda Devine vs The Hockey Stick

According to this profile, Miranda Devine (last seen making stuff up in an attempt to debunk the Lancet study), once worked for the textile physics division of CSIRO. So she should know that one purpose of peer review is to weed out scientific papers that are inaccurate or where the conclusions are not properly supported…

DDT Hoax Update

Ted Lapkin has objected to my reference to him in my post on the Great DDT Hoax. In his email he writes: I would very much prefer, if possible, to keep things on an informal basis rather than a legal one. Thus this whole misunderstanding can be cleared up by a retraction and apology on…

RJ Rummel vs Lancet study, round 2

R.J. Rummel has a response to my earlier post on the Lancet study. Unfortunately he still does not understand what the researchers did. In his original post Rummel claimed the pre-invasion statistics came from Saddam’s Ministry of Health. In fact, they come from the survey the researchers conducted. Despite my explanation, Rummel now argues: However,…

Bangled Tank

The Tangled Bank is a showcase of blog posts on biology, medicine or natural history. The latest compilation is here.

King at SCSU Scholars has updated his post attacking the Lancet study with a response to my post. He admits error on one point, but on the rest he has the nerve to accuse me of bringing biases rather than facts to the debate. To see who is bringing facts and who is bringing biases…

In today’s Sydney Morning Herald Miranda Devine has a go at the Lancet study, writing The British medical journal The Lancet published a paper last October (timed deliberately, its authors admit, before the US presidential election), estimating that 100,000 more Iraqis died than would have been expected if the war had not happened. Since then,…

Iain Murray paints himself into a corner

Via Chris Brook and Anthony Cox, I find that Melanie Philips took the same combination of ignorance of science and utter certainty that the scientists are wrong that she used to “prove” that global warming was a scam and conducted a grossly irresponsible scare campaign against vaccination. On this issue, for once, Tech Central Station…

The Charge of the Clueless Brigade

Last week Kyoto came into effect. Apparently that was the signal for columns by a whole bunch of pundits who have two features in common: 1. they are manifestly ill-equipped to understand the science and 2. they are utterly certain that there is no such thing as global warming. Our first pundit is Michael Duffy…

Oh my god – he blamed Kerry

King at SCSU Scholars has had another go at the Lancet study. King writes: Many of Saddam’s dead were not murdered in the presence of witnesses; there is no indication that the authors of the study charged Saddam with a death for a missing person. It doesn’t matter whether the death was witnessed or not,…