« Yellowstone is rising | Main | Weekly round up »

Bookmark in Connotea

INTERVIEW: author of spoof paper speaks - November 09, 2007

It’s the interview they all wanted. Earlier this week climate change sceptics were receiving an email from one Dr Mark Cox. In this email Dr Cox implored them to write about a tale of “treatment of some academic colleagues by what seems like a kind of ‘climate change mafia’”. Cox’s colleagues had discovered evidence that overthrew the idea of man-made global warming, the email said.

Those who took this email at face value are now looking rather foolish (see our earlier post for details). But why did “Dr Mark Cox” create a fictional journal, write a bogus paper, invent authors, reviewers and implore sceptics to write about the paper? Read on...

After attempting to get hold of the person behind the 'Journal of Geoclimatic Studies' we were contacted by “Dr Mark Cox”. Well, it’s someone who said they were Dr Cox, it could be someone spoofing the spoofer but you have to trust people at some point, even if they are claiming to be people who construct elaborate hoaxes.

Can you tell me your real name?

No

What do you do for a living? Do you work in the climate field and/or have you studied climate change?

I work in a related field

Can you say where?

No

Why did you decide to construct the fake website? Was it purely a joke or did you set out to make people taking your paper at face value look foolish?

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.

Are you surprised at the pick up your coverage has generated?

Not really. Equally ridiculous claims - like those in the paper attached to the "Oregon Petition" or David Bellamy's dodgy glacier figures - have been widely circulated and taken up by the ‘sceptic’ community. But you can explain this until you are blue in the face. To get people to sit up and listen, you have to demonstrate it. This is what I set out to do.

How quickly did you expect people to realise that your paper was fake?

In the Age of Google, hoaxes can't last for very long. But it hooked quite a few prominent sceptics before it was exposed. According to the various exposes now circulating online, among others, Rush Limbaugh broadcast it on his programme, James Inhofe's office posted it on his site [Editor's note: Sen. Inhofe's office says it was never posted on his website], Benny Peiser sent it to 2000 people and Ron Bailey wrote it up in glowing terms.

How long did it take to put the site together?

Four days.

Why is the site no longer up? Did you take it down yourself?

The company hosting the site decided to take it down.

What would you say to those who were taken in by your spoof?

More fool you.

What is your actual view on climate change? Do you think humanity is to blame for the current observed warming?

Yes. The science could scarcely be clearer.

Do you have other such spoofs in the pipeline?

That would be telling.

Comments

Thank you for proving us skeptics can be fooled..

Now when will the "global warming religion" admit they too are doing it for research money and just basically for controling others' freedom.

The alleged hoaxer should be reminded that Ron Bailey of Reason magazine is not a skeptic, as he reminded folks himself when writing about the hoax. I analyzed the number of skeptics fooled here, in case anyone cares.

What is truly interesting is the speed at which the 'skeptics' excavated the fallacious nature of the report. It was clearly a well crafted black-ops to get skeptics to take the bait. It worked but only by erroneously assumed certification by Dr. Spencer. Remarkably, the 'warmers' want to silence critics rather than debate the merits of their position. That is perhaps the most telling.

Not only are incidences of intentionally faked science on the rise, but people seem generally not to be too upset about them. I suspect such juvenile delinquency has diminished the reputation of both science and scientists, has led to a debasement of scientific methodology, and hampers scientific advancement; but on a happier note these problematic games make such mendacious buffoons as commit these politically motivated frauds both despised and pitied.

This is a great service. This was a wonderful service and, well, now poor Rush Limbaugh has fallen for the spoof. What will happen next?

Typical Algoreite. Rather than try and have a debate on the issue (the evidence is FAR from clear as to the cause of "global warming") they simply want to harass and insult those of us who don't buy into their Inconvenient Truth.

No less a scientific authority than Rush Limbaugh took the bait, devoting an hour of airtime to explaining the ersatz paper's policy implications to his 20 million listeners, all the while dismissing anguished notes from, among others, Roy Spencer,trying to convince him that they meant the hoax was a hoax, rather than global warming , as he has so long maintained.

Here are some of the details of this year's answer to the War Of The Worlds broadcast--
http://adamant.typepad.com/seitz/2007/11/rush-to-judgeme.html

David Thorpe. Wales. Writer of children's fiction; "environmental journalist". And despite his rather smug self-satisfaction, he comes off looking somewhat silly and wholly unserious. Resulting, I think, in global warming skepticism ratcheting up a notch or two. Congratulations, Mr. Thorpe. Well done.

You might find that the real name of this person is
David Thorpe
- and then again maybe you wont.

Unit 1, Forest Studios,
Ceinws, Machynlleth,
Powys SY20 9HA, UK
T: 44 1654 761590
C: 44 790 192 5671
info@cyberium.co.uk
www.cyberium.co.uk

Here is the Domain information:

Domain ID:D21379999-LRMS

Domain Name:GEOCLIMATICSTUDIES.INFO

Created On:02-Nov-2007 14:50:19 UTC

Expiration Date:02-Nov-2008 14:50:19 UTC Sponsoring Registrar:Tucows Inc. (R139-LRMS) Status:TRANSFER PROHIBITED Registrant ID:turLDvUkPFjmOK1C Registrant Name:Hiroko Takebe Registrant Organization:Dr Hiroko Takebe Registrant Street1:Climatological Department, Okinawa University Registrant Street2:

Registrant Street3:
Registrant City:Okinawa
Registrant State/Province:Okinawa
Registrant Postal Code:OK-184NJ
Registrant Country:JP
Registrant Phone:+81.9845791066
Registrant Phone Ext.:
Registrant FAX:
Registrant FAX Ext.:
Registrant Email:hiroko.takabe@okinawa.ac.jp Admin ID:tuT6jKg9v6VinjbX Admin Name:David Thorpe Admin Organization:David Thorpe Admin Street1:Cyberium Admin Street2:

Admin Street3:
Admin City:Machynlleth
Admin State/Province:Powys
Admin Postal Code:SY209HA
Admin Country:GB
Admin Phone:+44.1654761590
Admin Phone Ext.:
Admin FAX:
Admin FAX Ext.:
Billing ID:tutOWSEIIFVPX1PE
Billing Name:David Thorpe
Billing Organization:David Thorpe
Billing Street1:Cyberium
Billing Street2:
Billing Street3:
Billing City:Machynlleth
Billing State/Province:Powys
Billing Postal Code:SY209HA
illing Country:GB
Billing Phone:+44.1654761590
Billing Phone Ext.:
Billing FAX:
Billing FAX Ext.:
Tech ID:tuXpofnS7OEDCsbj
ech Name:VISN Hostmaster
Tech Organization:Vision Internet Limited Tech Street1:PO Box 82 Tech Street2:
ech Street3:
Tech City:Hyde
Tech State/Province:Cheshire
Tech Postal Code:SK146FF
Tech Country:GB
Tech Phone:+44.1457763501
Tech Phone Ext.:
Tech FAX:+44.1457763501
Tech FAX Ext.:
Tech Email:hostmaster@visn.co.uk
Name Server:NS1.VISN.CO.UK
Name Server:NS0.VISN.CO.UK

This hoax seems to have lasted for about an hour, and didn't fool me. The 'hockey stick' hoax is still circulating despite being thoroughly discredited in terms of proxies and methodology. I wasn't fooled by that either.

that's really great! I'll use this action as an example of the "professional" work of climate sceptics. Thank you very much :)

While I get why, I find it regrettable this guy has to remain anonymous...

Thing is, I'd love to buy him a beer for this. Or six.

Hope someone is, anyway.

Hi,
Can you ask Dr Cox whether he had any involvement with the spoof historic temperature graph contained in Al Gore's AIT film please?

Now that one really is a classic!

Amazingly, even a fictitious climate change sceptic's website still provides proof for some, not only that climate change doesn't exist, but that it is an (international?) conspiracy for "controlling other people's freedom."

I think some people might have missed the point...

It is bad form to post personal information, including name, address, and telephone number, without permission.

I suggest that the people mainting this blog delete the comment by Simon Alexander. Posting private information like he has done is intended to lead to harrassment. It serves no legitimate purpose.

[Editors note – as far as I am aware the phone numbers this post is referring to are for corporations (ie the hosting company concerned), are in the public domain, and are not personal. If you think we have erred in this please let me know.]

Tomorrow brings the weekly column of George Monbiot, whom one imagines will have something to say,or confess, about the matter.

The problem with Rush Limbaugh and other opponents of good environmental stewardship picking up the story and reporting on it is that millions of people who share their beliefs are listening. This hoax story appears to support what they wish to believe. When a retraction is broadcast, if ever, they won't notice. They'll continue telling themselves and each other that science is behind their view that humans are not responsible for global warming. Overall, the spoof is an unfunny distraction that discredits environmentalists and scientists.

For this to be proof of "the credulity and scientific illiteracy of many of the people who call themselves climate sceptics [sic]", there needs to be a control. For instance, how many people who are believers in human-caused global warming would be snared by a site with bogus facts showing that warming was, say, worse than previously thought?

In answer to Michael Maxwell's question, given Al Gore got a share of a Nobel Peace Prize with his exaggerated claims we can safely conclude "rather a lot".

I think well done to the spoofer. I don't think sceptics are (much) more credulous than anyone else and that a fairly regular supply of these spoofs -with humiliation of the gullible to follow - will help teach us all to inspect 'evidence' before forming opinions. It is not harassment to present fairly easily uncovered spoofs and then jeer at those too hasty too check.

Post a comment

Comments will be reviewed by the blog editors before being published, mainly to ensure that spam and irrelevant material (such as product advertisements) are not published . Please keep your comment brief. Excessively long or offensively phrased entries will be edited.

We strongly encourage you to use your real, full name. E-mail addresses are required in case we need to discuss your comment with you directly. We won't publish your e-mail address unless you request it.

Please enter the numbers you see below - this helps us to avoid spam. If you are having trouble with this system, you can send your comment by e-mail to 'thegreatbeyond at nature.com'.

please enter code

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://blogs.nature.com/cgi-bin/mt/mt-tb.cgi/3876