Socrates on the ropes

That he had escaped censure raised deeper questions about (social) science and the Academy.

"How was it that such shoddy, prejudiced, and partial research passed the seemingly objective tests of peer-review, and that such errors of category, method and analysis were nonetheless deemed worthy of publication by editors of scientific publications?"

If Lewandowsky's work was representative of the quality of scientific research and the Academy's standards, what did it say about climate science and the quality of the so-called scientific consensus?

The saga continues, as does the smell of rotting fish - and dead horse.

On 18^th March 2013, online journal Frontiers published another paper by Lewandowsky, Oberauer, et. al. Titled "Recursive fury: Conspiracist ideation in the blogosphere in response to research on conspiracist ideation", some thought it was a spoof, a quirky homage to Alan Sokal.

Not so. Our intrepid researchers cannily took the critical responses – now dubbed "recursive fury" - to the initial "moon-landing" paper (LOG12) as a valid data-set and thrust it into their Conspiracist Ideation Analyser (CIA), which duly churned out a predictable conclusion.

"This article analyzes the response of the climate blogosphere to the publication of LOG12. We identify and trace the hypotheses that emerged in response to LOG12 and that questioned the validity of the paper's conclusions. Using established criteria to identify conspiracist ideation, we show that many of the hypotheses exhibited conspiratorial content and counterfactual thinking...although alternative scholarly interpretations may be advanced in the future."

After another surge of recursive fury – more data for the CIA - Frontiers posted a statement several months ago that remains on the site.

"This article has been the subject of complaints. Given the nature of some of these complaints, Frontiers has provisionally removed the link to it while they are investigated, which is being done as swiftly as possible and which Frontiers management considers the most responsible course of action. The article has not been retracted or withdrawn."

Meanwhile, the world waits patiently for the appearance of some "alternative scholarly interpretations."

There was another momentous event this year. Lewandowsky became Chair of Cognitive Psychology at Bristol University's School of Experimental Psychology, but remains an STW Principal.

With controversy still swirling in the blogosphere, a BU media release stated his work offered "enormous benefits in the fields of experimental psychology, climate research and the wider public engagement with and understanding of scientific research."