Lewandowsky Timeline

This page provides a timeline for understanding the two papers by Lewandowsky et al. which discuss conspiracist ideation among climate sceptics. I shall be updating it continuously. Additions and hints on formatting welcome.


“NASA faked the moon landing|Therefore (Climate) Science is a Hoax: An Anatomy of the Motivated Rejection of Science”: by Stephan Lewandowsky, Klaus Oberauer, Gilles Gignac (in press)



“Recursive fury: conspiracist ideation in the blogosphere in response to research on conspiracist ideation”: by Stephan Lewandowsky, John Cook, Klaus Oberauer and Michael Marriott


[NOTE: Abstract, PDF and Supplemental Data available at top right. PDF DIFFERS FROM THIS VERSION]

This article is divided into three parts. Each part is in chronological order, but frequent commenters (JoNova, Lewandowsky) are kept together as a block:

1.August-September 2010: Fieldwork for LOG12 and related events:

2. July-October 2012: Pre-publication of LOG12 and reactions.

3. February 2013 onwards: Publication of LCOM13 and reactions.


1.August-September 2010: Fieldwork for LOG12 and related events

Articles published at the following blogs, inviting participation in survey


29 August 2010: coby: “Counting your Attitudes” (4 comments)


29 August 2010: Scott Mandia: “Scientists want help with an opinion survey regarding climate change” (6 comments)


29 August 2010: Tim Lambert: “Survey on attitudes towards climate science”

“Stephan Lewandowsky is conducting a survey on attitudes towards climate science and related issues and is interested in responses from readers of pro-science blogs”. (48 comments)


30 August 2010: gareth: Questionnaire:

“The Cognitive Science Lab at the University of Western Australia has put together an internet survey to test people’s attitudes to science. Prof Stephan Lewandowsky describes it thus: ‘the rationale behind the survey is to draw linkages between attitudes to climate science and other scientific propositions (eg HIV/AIDS) and to look at what skepticism might mean (in terms of endorsing a variety of propositions made in the media)’. He’s particularly interested in the views of people who follow science blogs, so please go along and give it a try”. (4 comments)


28 August 2010: “Survey says…” (55 comments)


28 August 2010: Barry Bickmore: “Take a Survey!” (7 comments)

[LOG12 claimed that invitations to participate had also been posted at the following two blogs]



September 9 2010: Invitations to participate sent to five sceptic blogs in name of Charles Hanich

September 21 2010: Reminders sent to five sceptic blogs

September 23 2010: Lewandowsky revealed preliminary  results of  survey  in talk at Monash University ________________________________________________________________

                          2. July-October 2012: Pre-publication of LOG12 and reactions.

LOG12 earliest references:


19 July 2012: No link (2 comments)


19 July 2012: Same article as above. No link (400+ comments)


29 July 2012 [LINK TO ARTICLE] (1354 comments)


29 July 2012: Pierre Gosselin (19 comments)


30 July 2012 (70 comments)



30 July 2012


2 August 2012: Same article as 29 July Guardian above. (39 comments)


28 August 2012: Jonathan Pearlman (346 comments)


29 August 2012: (93 comments)


31 August 2012: [LINK TO RAW DATA] (106 comments)


16 July 2012: Relevant comments begin 1 September 2012 (Comment 6 by Geoffchambers) (155 comments)


Comments at http://joannenova.com.au/


29 August 2012: 


6 September 2012: (212 comments)


 8 September 2012: (87 comments)


9 September 2012 (44 comments)


10 September 2012 (136 comments)


11 September 2012 (124 comments)


14 September 2012 (151 comments)


18 September 2012 (101 comments)


19 September 2012 (140 comments)


Articles by Lucia Liljegren


29 August 2012 (112 comments)


30 August 2012 (170 comments)


31 August 2012 (96 comments)


14 September 2012 (94 comments)


15 September 2012 (148 comments)


articles by jeff id






—————————————————————————————————articles by Lewandowsky defending LOG12


3 September 2012: NASA and the blogosphere (28 comments)


4 September 2012: Misplaced email in the climate wars? Not again, please! (62 comments)


6 September 2012: Confirming the obvious (62 comments)


7 September 2012: An update on my birth certificates (214 comments)


9 September 2012: A Cabal of Bankers and Sister Souljah (151 comments)


10 September 2012: Bloggers’ Hall of Amnesia (132 comments)


12 September 2012: Lewandowsky & Oberauer: Faking that NASA faked the moon landing (110 comments)


13 September 2012: Lewandowsky & Oberauer: Climate denial: a “warmist” hoax? (421 comments)


17 September 2012: Lewandowsky & Oberauer: Drilling into Noise (474 comments)


19 September 2012: Oberauer & Lewandowsky: A Simple Recipe for the Manufacturing of Doubt (654 comments)


Articles by “Recursive Fury” author Michael Marriott 


24 August 2012 (19 comments)


28 August 2012 (5 comments)


4 September 2012 (3 comments)


4 September 2012 (34 comments)


6 September 2012 (0 comments) 


6 September 2012 (12 comments)


6 September 2012 (12 comments)


7 September 2012 (20 comments)


10 September 2012 (6 comments) http://watchingthedeniers.wordpress.com/2012/09/11/inboxgate-names-of-sceptic-bloggers-contacted-revealed-for-nasa-paper-sceptics-still-not-happy/

11 September 2012 (7 comments)


13 September 2012 (45 comments)


17 September 2012 (40 comments)


Articles by Steve McIntyre


8 September 2012 (157 comments)


10 September 2012 (81 comments)


10 September 2012 (132 comments)


12 September 2012 (82 comments)


12 September 2012 (42 comments)


13 September 2012 (40 comments)


14 September 2012 (128 comments)


14 September 2012 (29 comments)


15 September 2012 (153 comments)


16 September 2012 (114 comments)


18 September 2012 (132 comments)


20 September 2012 (266 comments)


23 September 2012 (256 comments)


Articles at Wattsupwiththat, by Anthony Watts unless otherwise indicated


12 September  2012: (32 comments)


12 September  2012: (103 comments)


13 September  2012: (52 comments)


14 September  2012: (67 comments)


15 September  2012: (87 comments)


15 September  2012: (179 comments)


15 September  2012: by Thomas Fuller (78 comments)


17 September  2012: (107 comments)


20 September  2012: (45 comments)


21 September  2012: (91 comments)


27 September  2012: by Jeff Condon (50 comments)


12 October  2012: (62 comments)


Articles by Other Bloggers: September October 2012


16 September 2012 “NASA Faked Moon Landing—Academic Psychologists Swoon, Tie It To Climate Change” (43 comments)


                   3. February 2013 onwards: Publication of LCOM13 and reactions.


5 February 2013: LCOM13 pre-published, then removed “for typsetting”

18 March 2013: LCOM13 published, in two different versions



5 February 2013 (85 comments)


5 February  2013: by Guest Blogger (136 comments)


6 February  2013: by Jeff Condon (106 comments)


9 March 2013: Brandon Shollenberger (90 comments)


22 March 2013 (116 comments)


20 March  2013: (58 comments)


20 March  2013: (40 comments)


21 March  2013: (81 comments)


22 March 2013 Cook & Lewandowsky:  (11 comments)


22 March 2013 (79 comments)

About Geoff Chambers

Retired illustrator (children's magazines, religious education textbooks, an Encyclopaedia of Christianity, gay contact and female fitness magazines, pornographic strip cartoons etc.) Retired lecturer in English and History of Art in a French University; ardent blogger on climate hysteria, banned five times from the Guardian and twice from the Conversation. Now blogging at Cliscep.com
This entry was posted in Stephan Lewandowsky and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink.

14 Responses to Lewandowsky Timeline

  1. manicbeancounter says:

    The watchingthedeniers posting has 79 comments
    The Cook & Lewandowsky posting (at http://www.shapingtomorrowsworld.org/Recursive-Fury-Facts-misrepresentations.html) is now 12 comments

    More important to track is the exchanges between Steve McIntyre and Stephan Lewandowsky et. al. (at Shaping Tomorrow’s World).
    This can be observed from http://climateaudit.org/?s=lewandowsky
    McIntyre’s first salvo is at http://climateaudit.org/2012/09/08/lewandowsky-scam/
    It is important to get the sequence right, as historians will be able to observe how Lewandowsky et. al. dig themselves into a deeper and deeper hole. The staistics bit starts with http://climateaudit.org/2012/09/16/trying-unsuccessfully-to-replicate-lewandowsky/

    Potentially the most important is Steve McIntyre reporting on a comparative survey of belief in conspiracy theories with WUWT readers to discern the number of fake responses.
    McIntyre’s conclusion related to the responses Lewandowsky survey which professed strong belief in 4 or more conspiracy theories.
    “In my opinion, all these 48 Lewandowsky responses are fake.”

  2. Climate Daily says:

    Reblogged this on Climate Daily.

  3. It’s not finished yet! Wattsupwiththat, Tallbloke and Climate Etc are missing, and no doubt many more. This is a “cut out and keep” article for reference. Come back in a couple of days when it’s nearer completion.

  4. Skiphil says:

    Thanks Geoff, this is a great help to all. I’m only popping online for minutes these days, but I hope to slow down and review all of this material soon.

  5. Rolf Degen says:

    The biggest German newsmagazine which has also the No 1 news webseite in Germany now has a report on the “NASA faked the moon landing” study that totally spreds the message of Lewandowsky without any hint of doubt. You find it here, try google translate:


  6. hro001 says:

    Hi Geoff, this is great … but if I might be permitted to pick a few nits …


    29 July 2012 [LINK TO ARTICLE] (1354 comments)



    2 August 2012: Same article as 29 July Guardian above. (39 comments)

    The Guardian article is actually dated July 27, 2012. It might also be helpful (for the benefit of future newcomers to this increasingly convoluted and oh-so-foggy scene!) to identify both of these as Adam Corner’s.

    For some reason (possibly a WP glitch?) the link you had provided:


    16 July 2012: Relevant comments begin 1 September 2012 (Comment 6 by Geoffchambers) (155 comments)

    does not work (takes one to “Page not found” [the last character was not included in your hyperlink])

    You also asked for “additions and hints on formatting”. Regarding the latter, first of all … this might be easier to maintain in an Excel spreadsheet (which you quite possibly already have) which you could make available via GoogleDocs – or other “cloud” based resources – and just note any additions/updates in this post (which you might want to convert to a Page that can be readily accessed via your top menu once this “disappears” from your list of “Recent Posts”).

    Secondly, it could just be me, but when I see stand-alone “bold text“, such as you have used throughout, I tend to think of it as a heading, with the expectation that that which follows will be related. But you seem to have reversed this 😉

    As for additions … In your “Articles by Other Bloggers: September October 2012” section, I’m surprised you didn’t include that to which you had alerted me, i.e. my very own spot in Lew’s hit-list of “data” for his cursing Recursive Fury …”paper”.

    For the record, Lew’s Sept. 2012 antics (and those of his acolytes and lesser lights) had provided fodder for three posts on my blog during this time period:

    Sept. 16: The big Lewandowsky … and the 97% [snippet from which appeared in Lew’s “honour roll” of “data”]

    Sept. 17: Lewandowsky booster, Bostrom, invokes 10:10 no pressure “defense”

    Sept. 18: APS blogger didn’t get Lewandowsky’s title “joke”

    Perhaps of even lesser import, but within the same timeframe, is a post in which I had acknowledged the inspiration of “Lewandowsky’s (highly unscientific) survey techniques”

    Sept. 22: Survey participation invited: Does fear of CO2 cause extreme voting?

    But of greater import than any of the above modest contributions on my part is (IMHO) a Lew-paper I recently discovered which doesn’t quite fit in any of your three main parts.

    As I had posted in a comment on the latest CA thread:

    [begin slightly modified excerpt]
    [F]or the record, it should be noted that at least one of [Lewandowsky’s] looped assays appears to have made it into publication, via an “Article” in the April 2013 issue of Nature Climate Change:

    The pivotal role of perceived scientific consensus in acceptance of science

    Stephan Lewandowsky, Gilles E. Gignac & Samuel Vaughan

    Nature Climate Change Volume: 3, Pages: 399–404 Year published: (2013) DOI: doi:10.1038/nclimate1720

    Received 08 May 2012 Accepted 13 September 2012 Published online 28 October 2012
    {end excerpt]

    One of the references cited in this paper (presumably) submitted on May 8, 2012 is to (you guessed it) the infamous moon hoax paper. It is interesting to note that one of the references in Lew’s moon hoax paper at the link you had provided above is:

    Lewandowsky, S., Gignac, G. E., & Vaughan, S. (2012). Climate science is not alone: The pivotal role of perceived scienti c consensus in acceptance of science. Manuscript submitted for publication. [emphasis added -hro]

    Some might call this an exercise in “citation kiting” on the part of Lew and his co-authors. But I couldn’t possibly comment.

  7. Many thanks Hilary hro001
    Of course I was going to include your posts, and a lot of others, but events overtook me with Steve’s article and a lot of planning of official complaints etc.
    I’m no better at Excel than Phil Jones, and I don’t like the cramped look of the thing.
    You’re right about the bold. Here’s a beginner’s question: Is there any way to stop Word from skipping a line every time you start a new paragraph? It makes quoting poetry impossible, as well as separating chunks of information like my references into a meaningless list of lines.
    By the way, Rolf Degen, who commented just before you, is the author of “Cat Sense – Inside the Feline Mind”. Just thought you’d like to know. Now that’s psychology at its most profound…

    Rolf Degen
    Vielen Dank! I shall try to read it in the original before I resort to Google translate. At first glance, it doesn’t seem to go very deep.
    Pierre Gosselin at
    mentioned that the Moon Hoax article had already been mentioned in severalGerman papers, before anything in the English language press apparently except Huffington Post. Another thing to explore…

  8. hro001 says:

    Hi Geoff, you had asked:

    “Is there any way to stop Word from skipping a line every time you start a new paragraph?”

    Yes! Instead of hitting [Enter], use [SHIFT+Enter] … this will (or at least should!) insert what we call a line-break, rather than a paragraph break. Depending on your Version of Word, you can also change the format of your default paragraph. If you like, you could send me an E-mail letting me know which version you are using, then I can give you more specific instructions/alternatives on how to do this:-)

    But you need to be aware (and beware) of potential problems pasting from Word into WordPress … particularly if, as I suspect, you are using the wysiwyg (i.e. “Visual”) editor rather than the “Text” editor.

    There are ways of making an Excel spreadsheet look decent, btw (actually, I think even Phil Jones might be able to do this!); but since you prefer to use Word, a table in Word does give you a more accessible means of controlling appearance, and would probably work just as well.

    If I have time later today (or tomorrow … I have *work* to complete by deadline, and two half-written blogposts I’d like to finish), I might grab your text above and see what I can do with it … although if you already have it in a Word doc, perhaps you could send it to me (as an attachment, rather than pasted into an E-mail) and I can put into a decent table for you!

    But on second thoughts, after reading the delightful Foreword to Rolf’s book (thank you for pointing me in that direction), if I do find that extra time, I might be more inclined to indulge in downloading to it my Kindle (which I’m afraid to do now, because I know I won’t get my *work* done!) As I was skimming the sample, it occurred to me that there are definitely some parallels between the cat’s observations and those one might glean from Mother Nature (if she were to “talk” to us). Many lessons contained therein that could be learned by “climate scientists” , methinks 😉

  9. Pingback: Lewandowsky, Prof of Psychology, thinks the Labor Government doesn’t benefit if he calls their opponents “stupid”. | The GOLDEN RULE

  10. Pingback: Stephan Lewandowsky ‘flees’ Australia in wake of investigations | Watts Up With That?

  11. Pingback: The mystery of missing elements in Lewandowsky’s blog bluffery | The View From Here

  12. These types of automotive services are very important to you and your car or truck
    especially going into this weather change. A defective shock absorber jolts the car more
    frequently and tires are banged higher and rougher on the
    road. Using a car service today is more than a luxury, here are ten good reasons why you should consider it:

  13. Pingback: Frontears of mediocrity: Lewandowsky & Mann on the march | The View From Here

  14. Pingback: Mister <1%: Lew Screws Up Again | Geoffchambers's Blog

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s