This blog has gotten its first troll. I’ve been given the indication it’s a Skeptical Science team member. Let’s examine the humor.
I’m going to assume readers are familiar with my last post about Skeptical Science’s dishonesty. If not, you should read it. For now, I’m going to summarize where things stand on some of the issues it raises so the developments of the last couple days can be seen.
As you should know, I discovered Skeptical Science used a fabricated quote in a figure in a recent post. The figure with it was also used in at least two older posts. It was also published by Skeptical Science’s propriertor, John Cook, in a magazine article.
The last of these is where I discovered the fabrication. I pointed it out at the time, and Skeptical Science team member, Rob Honeycutt, commented on a post discussing it. That meant he knew about the quote fabrication. Naturally, I was troubled by that when I saw the recent post containing the quote. I began trying to contact people from that site, got censored and blah, blah, blah.
This is where the developments begin. About 48 hours ago, I announced I had found out there was a discussion in the Skeptical Science forums about my accucsations. That meant they knew about the issue and were keeping silent. I began posting on Twitter about this, and I initially asked how long we should wait before drawing conclusions.
After the tweet announcing it had been 36 hours, I posted another comment at Skeptical Science. Around the 48 hour mark, I posted that comment had been deleted. For the second time, they had deleted a comment to cover up their use of a fabricated quote. This time, they did so with an active discussion of the issue in their forum, meaning it definitely couldn’t have been the act of a lone operator – it was a policy decision by Skeptical Science. That is, the site, as a whole, had decided to stand by the use of a fabricated quote.
During all that, a major point was they refused to comment on this issue publicly. However, it turns out that point may not have been true. A little while back, I expressed my belief a user here, going by the handle Someone, was a troll. That’d make him the site’s first. That’s remarkable because I’ve been given the indication Someone is actually a Skeptical Science team member.
If that’s true, that’d mean they refuse to fix a fabricated quote, won’t comment on the issue publicly, censor people to cover the issue up, and after all that, one of them comes to this blog and trolls.
Can you think of a way they could dig themselves any deeper?