Some Skeptical Science members have been publicly accusing me of criminal hacking. None of them say just what it is I did that would be considered hacking. This is strange as I’ve explained just what I did. It should be easy for them to point to the illegal aspect. Instead, one of them (Collin Maessen) recently said:
I know exactly what you did and what you didn’t share about what you did. The details that you didn’t share would make it rather obvious that it was hacking. Even though it was at the script kiddie level.
If we’re to believe Maessen, I’m not just a criminal, I’m a liar too. Of course, Maessen refused to say what I “didn’t share.” If I held back information like he claims, it would be easy to prove. Why won’t he? Why won’t anyone from Skeptical Science? They claim it is obvious I lied and hacked. They just won’t give anyone the information which shows such. They’re doing so even when it requires violating their own moderation policies:
When making any claim provide references (links if possible). Failure to do so can result in the comment not going through moderation….
When asked to clarify an argument or point please respond; this isn’t optional.
Claims that are factually incorrect will not be allowed.
I don’t get that. Maessen accused me of a criminal offense, and he refuses to provide the slightest shred of evidence or information for his accusation. He apparently expects people to just take his word for it, even while he’s being completely hypocritical. Très bizarre.
Oh well. Since the Skeptical Science crowd doesn’t care to provide any information or evidence, I will. I’ve uploaded a list of every link I collected from the Skeptical Science forum. I collected these links by using URLs in the form of: http://sksforum.org/thread.php?p=X where X was a number.
You can see the numbers I used in the list (1-18633) along with the page I was redirected to. This is a list of links posted on the secret-secret Skeptical Science forum. You could have gotten any of these links by plugging their number into the URL I gave above.
You’ll note, many of the entries are given for a domain “secretdomain.org.” This isn’t the actual domain. I’ve replaced the domain of their secret-secret-secret forum with that because of certain concerns. It doesn’t matter because you wouldn’t be able to access anything on the site anyway. If you could though, this would be the link to look for:
If you plugged that in, you’d have direct access to a page that looked like:
I don’t know what information I’m supposedly hiding, but I’ll provide some more. Here are a couple links showing what sorts of things I tried to access:
3031 http://secretdomain.org/thread.php?t=6738&r=15#61211 3513 http://secretdomain.org/members.php 7280 http://secretdomain.org/docs/coming-out-of-ice-age-volcanoes.pdf 8572 http://secretdomain.org/docs/rebuttal_status/18.details.htm
The first two of those required logging in to access. The third and fourth did not. That’s hardly surprising as many sites make documents and images directories publicly accessible so the material in them can be shared. Given some things were blocked and others were not, it is reasonable for a person to try various links to see what they’re allowed to see. Apparently, the Skeptical Science crowd thinks that’s hacking.
Interestingly, two other links in the list are:
10099 http://www.skepticalscience.com/pics/tcp_raters2.gif 10100 http://www.skepticalscience.com/pics/tcp_raters3.gif
While those links no longer work, they are the images I discussed in this post. They provide the identities of 12 of the raters for the Cook et al consensus paper. In that post I said:
This one also identifies nearly a dozen individual participants. It’s true we only found out about these images because of a hack, but that hack happened nearly two years ago. Surely the authors of the paper shouldn’t leave confidential information in a publicly accessible location for two years, even if people have already seen it.
But it’s worse than that. Not only were the images publicly accessible for nearly two years after being discovered, John Cook continued to make it possible for anyone to find links to them. Plus, the links I collected only begin after the original forum was hacked. Who knows if we could have found the same links via the original forum?
Incidentally, you may have noticed one of the links I mentioned being able to access had a number in it. As you may have guessed, there were a series of pages in the form of http://secretdomain.org/docs/rebuttal_status/X.details.htm. I scraped a number of them (392?), but they didn’t contain anything interesting. It was just some proofreading information about various posts at Skeptical Science.
That’s it. There’s no more information to disclose. I don’t know what the Skeptical Science crowd thinks I’m hiding, and I suspect it doesn’t exist.
And hey, now you can see ~18,000 pages the Skeptical Science group discussed!