Home
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
Latest activity
Members
Current visitors
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Home
Forums
Brown Cafe Community Center
Current Events
The Straight Truth About the Bush Economy
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Tyrone Slothrop" data-source="post: 78402" data-attributes="member: 4701"><p>Figures you would use him, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bjorn_Lomborg" target="_blank">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bjorn_Lomborg</a>, for your rebuttal:</p><p>After the publication of <em>The Skeptical Environmentalist</em>, Lomborg was accused of <strong>scientific misconduct</strong>. Several environmental scientists brought a total of three complaints against Lomborg to the <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Danish_Committees_on_Scientific_Dishonesty" target="_blank">Danish Committees on Scientific Dishonesty</a> (DCSD), a body under Denmark's <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ministry_of_Science%2C_Technology_and_Innovation" target="_blank">Ministry of Science, Technology and Innovation</a>. The charges claimed that <em>The Skeptical Environmentalist</em> contained <em>deliberately</em> misleading data and flawed conclusions. Due to the similarity of the complaints, the DCSD decided to proceed on the three cases under one investigation.</p><p> On <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/January_6" target="_blank">January 6</a>, <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2003" target="_blank">2003</a> the DCSD reached a decision in the complaints. The ruling was a mixed message, finding the <em>book</em> constituted scientific <strong>dishonesty</strong>, but Lomborg himself not guilty by virtue of <strong>lack of expertise</strong> in the fields in question.</p><p></p><p>My God, you are a piece, tiegay.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Tyrone Slothrop, post: 78402, member: 4701"] Figures you would use him, [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bjorn_Lomborg"]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bjorn_Lomborg[/URL], for your rebuttal: After the publication of [I]The Skeptical Environmentalist[/I], Lomborg was accused of [B]scientific misconduct[/B]. Several environmental scientists brought a total of three complaints against Lomborg to the [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Danish_Committees_on_Scientific_Dishonesty"]Danish Committees on Scientific Dishonesty[/URL] (DCSD), a body under Denmark's [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ministry_of_Science%2C_Technology_and_Innovation"]Ministry of Science, Technology and Innovation[/URL]. The charges claimed that [I]The Skeptical Environmentalist[/I] contained [I]deliberately[/I] misleading data and flawed conclusions. Due to the similarity of the complaints, the DCSD decided to proceed on the three cases under one investigation. On [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/January_6"]January 6[/URL], [URL="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2003"]2003[/URL] the DCSD reached a decision in the complaints. The ruling was a mixed message, finding the [I]book[/I] constituted scientific [B]dishonesty[/B], but Lomborg himself not guilty by virtue of [B]lack of expertise[/B] in the fields in question. My God, you are a piece, tiegay. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Home
Forums
Brown Cafe Community Center
Current Events
The Straight Truth About the Bush Economy
Top