Professor Lewandowsky, who tweets under the name of @STWorg, has just opined on Twitter:

The former Conservative party is now a fascist-enabled white-nationalist outfit and not much more. And yet, so many people close their eyes to that transformation. It’s in plain sight and broad daylight.

To which Ben Pile has replied:

Really? “a fascist-enabled white-nationalist outfit and not much more”? You need to see a psychologist, Stephan. Or go for a walk, or something.

Following which about a thousand other people have piled in:

Symptoms of paranoia and delusional disorders:

– Intense irrational suspicion or mistrust

– Fear, anger, and betrayal senses

– Hypervigilance

– Difficulty forgiving

– Defensive attitude Argumentative

Another reasoned and evidenced conclusion from the heart of academia!

Thanks for that misinformation!

Imagine my surprise to find he is not a professor of particle physics

Nurse, nurse, he’s out of bed again!

This tweet is, to put it mildly, complete bullshit.

My nephew is thinking of going to Bristol Uni, I might have to have a word with him about his choice…

What planet are you on mate?

This monster bellend needs reporting, he should not be allowed anywhere near impressionable minds.

Ilive in Bristol and I thought it was a proper university not a plastic banana one.

You should not be in education! A warped mind teaching young minds. You should be removed.

And so on and on… hundreds of them, and not one of them except Ben has probably heard of Professor Lew until now.

It’s mildly irritating, having wasted hundreds of hours of my life pointing out the lies and academic crimes of this self-described expert in misinformation, to no avail, to think that he is probably toast now, his academic career in ruins, and all because he said something silly on the internet.

The fact that he lied about his sources, methodology and results in an academic paper; that he then lied about critics of his paper and insulted them in a second paper, and then in a third when the second was retracted, and repeated the lies on government financed blogs on two continents; that he quoted his phoney research in evidence before a parliamentary committee; that he recommended his retracted paper in an encyclopaedia article published by Oxford University Press; that he published survey results with informants aged ten and under and 30,000 plus; that he publicly vaunted as his “favourite conspiracy theory ever” a fake comment by a certain Donald Duck – all this has been pointed out in numerous complaints to universities, academic journals and publishers.

One journal retracted a paper on false grounds after discussions with Lewandowsky’s lawyers; and the OUP removed one reference from a bibliography which had been included due to a “mistake.” Otherwise, complaints have been dismissed or ignored – but no longer. This will be in the local paper and then the nationals. Lew will probably now be at least admonished, and advised to keep his bizarre opinions to himself. He’s unlikely to be invited to many more university conferences in Britain, not if the Conservatives win and start looking for savings to be made in the Higher Education Budget. Vice Chancellors are not bothered by having a serial liar on their staff, but bad publicity from a tweet is something else.

Oh well, didn’t they get Lysenko for tax evasion? Surely the coming fascist-enabled government can cook up something more blood-curdling than that?


  1. There’s a blog post here

    Meet Professor Stephan Lewandowsky from Bristol University and be terrified this man is teaching your kids.

    And as you say, oodles of tweets

    My theory is that this is the great Professor’s latest piece of “research”, as carried out previously. Say something ridiculously stupid, collect up the responses, and then write a “paper” about them. Though last time he did that it didn’t work out very well.

    Liked by 3 people

  2. I hope more people connect the dots regarding Lewandowsky. He is alien to academic integrity, and the gang of fellow deceptive extremists he co-authors and runs with are no better.
    And to think Lewandowsky is a member of the Royal Society.

    Liked by 1 person

  3. Ah yes, the Royal Society. How nice for the chickens to come home to roost so close to the tenth anniversary of Climategate – the vast cover-up of which, and deflection from which, led them even to the depths of honouring Lew. In future let’s suggest they lower the bar and at least aim for Nullius Insanitas.

    I feel Geoff’s pain. Although he wittily constructs an Al Lysenko mashup

    Oh well, didn’t they get Lysenko for tax evasion?

    It was in fact the great bravery of Andrei Sakharov that did for the cowardly, genocide-supporting pseudoscientist. We salute our modern-day Andrei.

    Liked by 1 person

  4. “Oh well, didn’t they get Lysenko for tax evasion?”

    Er, no, that was Andy Capp.

    Hang on a mo, I meant Al Capone.

    Lysenko was never formally punished for his crimes and IIRC died in retirement in the mid-70s. That said, he was, unlike Lewandovsky, publically attacked by prominent scientists, many of whom were executed for their stance.

    Exposing Lew as a charlatan is, to date, less risky though, after tomorrow night’s BeebDoc on Climategate, who knows?


  5. “It’s mildly irritating, having wasted hundreds of hours of my life pointing out the lies and academic crimes of this self-described expert in misinformation, to no avail, to think that he is probably toast now, his academic career in ruins, and all because he said something silly on the internet.”

    Geoff, I seriously doubt his career will be toast because of this. Many, and many serious, people are calling anything to the right of centre (or even near the centre but still left!) fascist these days. Unless and until the moral compass rights itself, one can get away with such. Maybe he’ll have to keep his head down for a bit. This is how he got away with all that stuff you note in the climate domain too (where the culturally correct consensus is indeed far more emphatic). Somehow I doubt it’ll be comfort that your efforts weren’t in the end all outbid by a single self-tweet.

    Liked by 4 people

  6. Andy, in my view, what Geoff has expressed is a hope worth holding onto. In other words, as Schrodinger plays out with this less-than-cool cat, it’s not certain to be false hope. The fact we’re in the throes of an election campaign is of course the other obvious factor right now. He may go down, at least relative to where he would have been.

    Liked by 2 people

  7. Has anyone got a log of SL’s flights ?
    I bet he flies home to Australia quite often.
    And is he actually American born ?


  8. These days words like fascist, Nazi, white supremacist are very heavy booword labels used to dehumanise a debater
    and poison the well, so to shut them down.

    I tend to think that Nazi and fascist are such heavy words
    that we shouldn’t actually use them
    No matter how unreasonable a person is they are are unlikely to be promoting actual genocide and totalitarianism.

    The liberal mob who throw these labels on people do seem to have a habit of PROJECTING themselves.

    A lefty who speaks up is called
    …. An Activist

    A righty who speaks up gets called
    … A Fascist

    Liked by 2 people

  9. “I tend to think that Nazi and fascist are such heavy words that we shouldn’t actually use them”

    I agree completely except that I’d be less polite about it. I’m adamant that their use in our context is ill-informed, a-historic and a disservice to the millions the Nazis massacred and those who died in the wars they caused.

    Sadly, many on the sceptical side are nearly as loutish (and as lazy) when they use terms such as eco-Nazis, Green Nazis, eco-Fascists and all the rest. We’ve all seen it.

    Ironically, when rather sinister climate-catastrophist movements emerge with a truck load of authoritarian baggage and worse – XR being the obvious example – we are perhaps at risk of lacking the conceptual tools to understand them. (For precedent, see e.g. “social fascism”.)

    And, if irony’s your thing, let’s recall that the first meaningful environmental protection laws to be passed in Europe were pushed through by Goering in the 1930s. Funny stuff, history.


    Liked by 1 person

    Thanks. I didn’t know about Sakharov (though I did know about Andy Cappone)

    Someone (I think Barry) once linked to a scan from a college newspaper about Lew’s student days in the US. He was born in Bavaria, but is now an Australian national, I think. Does anyone have a link for that scan?Knowing he’s German, I no longer make rude comments about his odd accent.

    I agree absolutely about the terms fascist and Nazi being off-limits, although Emmanuel Todd recently said in a TV interview: “Macron is not a fascist. Mussolini – he had an economic programme” which I found funny and telling. But he hasn’t been back on TV since.

    Note that Lew isn’t saying the Conservatives are fascists but “fascist-enabled.” In other words it’s Farage who is being accused of being a fascist. It’s worse than insulting, it’s inaccurate.

    Liked by 1 person

    You’re right that I have no way of knowing what effect his tweet will have. But if there are repercussions, it won’t be because of the content of the tweet itself, but because of people’s (i.e. Vice Chancellors’, academic colleagues’ …) estimate of what other people think the repercussions should be. One angry letter from the parent of a student to the Bristol Evening Post would be enough to set off a chain reaction. One decision by an editor not to publish such a letter might mean that nothing happens.

    This tendency to “other-directedness” (judging your own and others’ behaviour by the reactions of others rather than according to some established moral code) tends to reinforce the power relations in society at the expense of relations based on respect, moral judgement, etc. Famous and powerful people can dress up as Nazis or sodomise young girls with no problem, as long as no one thinks there’s a problem.

    It’s a cultural quirk you’ll no doubt appreciate that the fuss about carbon footprints and air miles is a (no doubt unconscious) attempt by a society with no moral compass to establish some objective rules of behaviour. It’s daft and dangerous, which is why I’m not criticising Lew for flying round the world to visit his daughters and grandchildren.

    Liked by 2 people

  12. I have always found the criticism of those that fly whilst proselytizing for carbon reduction polices rather odd. It should not be their flying that attracts criticism, but their hypocrisy. Some offenders recognize this and try to offset blame by buying indulgences, planting trees like reincarnated Johnny Appleseeds.

    Liked by 1 person

  13. Ah – Geof’s comment? well I’d criticise that… I’m definitely criticising lew for grade a hypocrite for flying.. billions of people will never fly… yet entitled privileged Lew wants to rub peoples faces in his privilege and 1st world entitlement.

    Liked by 1 person

  14. I have never met the ‘illustrious’ Professor Lew so can only judge on the basis of multiple moving images, notably those supplied by Brad, but if anyone looked less like an oversized, evil, intelligent oversized wolf with glowing eyes, it is he. Can’t imagine the great Lew playing Warcraft either My 13 year old grandson does.

    Liked by 1 person

  15. Barry. If the criticism is just for the hypocrisy, why are critics so interested in how many fights or air-miles are taken? This is not a measure of their hypocrisy.


  16. because, those that preach… tend to fly the most… simple.. so a measure of just how hypocritical they are.. not just flying, but excessive flying (and not even slumming it in economy, to make a ‘gesture’) remember – did you fly economy Emma? (attending Extinction R protest in London) – Emma Thompson. no I bloody didn’t… LOL

    Liked by 1 person

  17. Barry My argument runs thus. I cannot criticize Lew for multiple long distance fights because I have done exactly the same (when I lived in North America) and would do so again with no regrets. However, I have never tried to influence others not to do the same on the basis of “saving the planet” (do we actually have evidence that Lew has done this?) so I feel at liberty to criticise those that do or who go on endlessly about carbon emissions and the damage they are causing. That is why I believe the extent of their flying is immaterial. But each to their own.


  18. Speaking of green eco-scams and the actors who flock to them:
    When the wheels fell off a $9.5 billion US lawsuit that was waged against Chevron for false claims about South America and indigenous people some interesting facts came to light.
    Besides how the American greens had bribed judges and fabricated evidence, why certain famous actors were involved was documented.
    Mia Farrow, who was leading celebrity spokeswoman turns out to have been a very well paid celebrity spokeswoman.
    The web of corruption stretched everywhere, but to those of us who follow the climate madness, the web is disturbingly familiar.


    No, Lewandowsky is not a wolf – maybe a sheep in wolf’s clothing. I once went full screen on one of his Youtube chats to get a look at his bookshelf behind him. He and I would probably agree on a number of things. But experts in misinformation shouldn’t throw words like fascist around during an election.

    There’s another reason I don’t think the air miles gambit is useful one. We don’t believe airmiles are harmful, do we? So isn’t it hypocritical to criticise him for doing something we think is OK, just as it’s hypocritical for Emma Thompson to criticise us for doing stuff that she thinks is ok?

    The whole carbon footprint obsession is economic nonsense anyway. Your effect on the planet is proportional to your income and there’s an end of it. You can splash your entire income buying organic produce from a local farmer, but you can’t stop him from spending it on a trip to the Maldives. Buy only wooden Norwegian furniture handcarved by Lapps and delivered to your door by reindeer and Viking longboats, but it’ll still come packed in that horrid plastic popcorn which sticks electrostatically to you and to the outside of the dustbin bags. It’s insoluble. No wonder so many of us are suffering from climate depression.

    Liked by 1 person

  20. of course criticise people that lecture about airmiles, whilst racking op thousands (whether or not i believe air miles are bad) it shows rank hypocrisy.. and it works.. Greta has made all the celebs look like fools.. even Emma now feels guilty about it (symbolism of course, greta crew flew home, replacement crew flew out)

    calling out the hypocrisy is a must. as it actually focusses people on the impacts of policies!

    ITV April 2019 – Ema after flying in (1st class) to extinction Rebellion event

    – “But after flying in from the US, she told ITV News that she would not travel economy class, saying: “I bloody don’t. No!” –

    Telegraph September 2019:

    “Actress and climate change activist Dame Emma Thompson has addressed the backlash she has faced for flying, saying while she “may well be hypocritical” she now travels by air “much less”.

    The star, 60, came under fire earlier this year for flying from Los Angeles to London to join Extinction Rebellion demonstrators in the capital.

    Addressing the accusations of hypocrisy in an interview with ITV News’s Rageh Omaar, she said: “The message from Extinction Rebellion wasn’t that no one can fly, it was that for decades now we have been asking for clean energy and this has been ignored.

    “I may well be hypocritical by flying but I’m conscious of flying so I fly much less, but sometimes I have to when I’m working.

    “But I’ll continue to find ways to get to places without flying.”

    During the interview, Dame Emma said young climate change activists have “made me feel so ashamed that we have let them down to such a degree”.


    so calling out hypocrisy, has got people talking about policies.. all good!

    Liked by 1 person

  21. Barry exactamente. We believe the act of flying is not wrong, thus we commit no hypocrisy when doing so. We must conclude, however, that a person sitting next to us on the plane who tries to convince us that our flying is wrong is a hypocrite, not for flying itself, but for flying despite believing it to be wrong (unless they’ve planted a forest). The amount they fly cannot increase their hypocrisy, only the degree to which a hypocrite blames others for what they are doing can do that.
    It matters little, because we know who the hypocrites are. I have no need to know just how much they fly.

    Liked by 1 person

  22. The derangement and potentially dangerous outcomes of the climate mob and flying is like Pol Pot wearing eyeglasses while leading the Khmer Rouge and their war against the urban culture and those dependent on dentures, hearing aids, insulin, and eyeglasses. Which included killing those with eyeglasses, dentures, hearing aids or medicine.

    Liked by 1 person

  23. I wonder if Greta has ever flown at all. My Asperger’s makes it uncomfortable for me to even think of being trapped in a box with a large bunch of strangers. Perhaps that is why she isn’t a “hypocrite”.

    Liked by 1 person

    She’s ok spending weeks on a catamaran with total strangers, so I don’t think that’s the reason. She doesn’t approve of eating meat, and once gave up eating altogether, so no hypocrisy there. And she recommends not talking to people who say something you disagree with, and once didn’t talk to anyone for a whole year, so no hypocrisy there either.

    Liked by 1 person

  25. The Lew saga makes me wonder, not for the first time, what influence our names have on our fortunes. Would he have been such a successful charlatan if his name had been Kevin Snooks. I have a suspicion that people in English speaking countries may be prone to being over impressed by those with German and Eastern European handles, particularly if the title ‘professor’ is added.

    Liked by 1 person

  26. The former Conservative party is now a fascist-enabled white-nationalist outfit and not much more. And yet, so many people close their eyes to that transformation. It’s in plain sight and broad daylight.

    Wow! Does Chancellor Sajid Javid know about this? 😀

    Liked by 1 person

  27. GEOFF:

    I didn’t intend to call Greta a hypocrite. In fact, I wouldn’t even if she took a commercial flight back to Europe. The plane is flying there anyway, so it wouldn’t matter whether she was on it or not.

    My problem is more a matter of over stimulation: too many people in one place at one time. Crowded theaters and restaurants are also a problem. I thought that Greta and I might have that in common.

    Actually I wouldn’t have a problem with sailing across the Atlantic in a luxury yacht with a small number of strangers. And they wouldn’t be strangers by the time we arrived.

    Sorry for the misunderstanding. I sometimes have trouble expressing myself clearly. (And I talk about myself too much. It’s part of the syndrome.)

    Liked by 2 people

  28. Michael,

    I understood your point perfectly, and I hadn’t appreciated that aspect of autism before. So thank you for writing!

    “(And I talk about myself too much. It’s part of the syndrome.)”

    People talk about themselves all the time. (Literally all the time according to some linguists, who argue that we’re the true subject of every utterance we make.) So don’t apologize.

    Liked by 2 people

  29. But Richard a more important question for Brad is how can he come here, seemingly out of the blue with a response to comments made more than a year ago? As to the me, problem, we all indulge and a few of us are interested.

    What I would like to know is when we can anticipate a Brad (insert word of choice here)? They have been like hens’ teeth recently and much missed.

    Liked by 2 people

  30. Alan, you should know me well enough to know it was a joke.

    Two things to add though:
    * I’d love to hear more from Brad again, on any thread, about anything
    * I stongly approve going back to old threads and comments, as he has done recently.

    One admin decision I’ve not drawn attention to, among other discussions in the first half of the year, is to keep all our threads open to further comment. “This site uses Akismet to reduce spam” as it says at the bottom of this and every page and that protects us, so far, from resulting silliness. I think it’s great to reheat or radically rethink the past, as well as produce new posts. But that’s just me. And maybe Brad 😉

    Liked by 2 people

  31. Richard, and you should know me well enough to know that I rarely criticise inhabitants of this blog-space and I knew it was some form of joke. My intent this time was to induce a Brad response. He has largely ignored previous efforts ☹️

    I suppose I never thought about keeping threads open. I always thought that if a topic resurfaced, it would be the subject of a new thread perhaps if some Good Samaritan forged a link then😇

    Liked by 2 people

Leave a Reply

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

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

Facebook photo

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

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.