The de-published man

Stephan Lewandowski now has the rare "honour" of being twice de-published.  His first lulu of a paper -- designed to tar climate skeptics as maladjusted -- was first accepted for publication (though it has never been printed) but then withdrawn by the journal from its publication queue after many protests over its dubious "science".

Lewandowski seems however to have been rather peeved by that and wrote a second paper doubling down.  He once again slimed climate skeptics using very dubious logic -- as I reported on 6th.  His second paper was however in a very humble journal, where the author has to pay to get published.

Not only his logic in the second paper was faulty, however.  He repeated claims from his first paper that he knew by then to be false.  He lied.  So his second paper has also now been withdrawn by the journal.

What is wrong with the man?  How can he have any respect for his own case when he has to lie to support it?  What he writes sounds sane and logical until you look into it.  Where does he go wrong?

I think there is an obvious answer.  There is a lot of psychopathy on the Left and from what I see Lewandowski is one of them.  The hallmark of psychopathy is that they are plausible but careless liars.  They sound good at the time but the lies shatter under scrutiny.  A classic example is Bill Clinton's claim that Hillary was named after Mt. Everest pioneer Sir Edmund Hillary.  Sir Edmund was just another New Zealand sheep farmer when the future Mrs Clinton was born.  He didn't climb Everest until 7 years later.

One must seriously wonder about Lewandowski's continued employment at the University of Western Australia.  Is such an unreliable character fit to be a teacher at any level?     One expects politicians to lie, but teachers?


Posted by John J. Ray (M.A.; Ph.D.).