Live data from Hacker News

Undercover Activists Buy Off Professors in Climate Sting

magazine.good.is

11–20 of 96 posts

Re: Undercover Activists Buy Off Professors in Climate Sting

#11
post #7
post #4

I feel like I'm missing out on a lot of cash. Anyone want to let me know who will buy off a math professor?

The cigarrette companies hire statisticians to publish bogus research about the health effects of smoking.

Really any drug company (or an anti-drug organization like the DEA) would be looking for someone who can do dark magic with statistics.

Re: Undercover Activists Buy Off Professors in Climate Sting

#12
post #9
post #4

I feel like I'm missing out on a lot of cash. Anyone want to let me know who will buy off a math professor?

Hiring a math professor to claim that squaring a circle is possible. 10M OBO.

You mean using a taxicab metric to construct a circle? Been done.

Re: Undercover Activists Buy Off Professors in Climate Sting

#13
post #3

Hm, I feel like this is way less sinister than it sounds. From what I know of his prior reputation, Will Happer has long made his position on climate change clear, so it's not like he changed his mind when people offered him a big pile of money. If you already believe something and someone is going to give you money to promote your views, why on earth would you say no?

[deleted]

Re: Undercover Activists Buy Off Professors in Climate Sting

#14
I have some questions about this "sting" that were unanswered in the article. It would be one thing if the academic were paid to have a certain opinion, its is another thing entirely to pay an academic to falsify research supporting a viewpoint they already hold. It reads as if the academics were paid to support a thesis with evidence. Once you are at a high enough academic level you should be able to write a paper arguing for and supporting a thesis whether or not you believe in that thesis on a personal level. It's important to sustain debate on all sides of an issue regardless of whether or not all of those sides are politically popular.

The great thing about publishing is that it gives other educated people a chance to rebut and question the argument.

I also believe funding sources should be kept secret in some cases so that the paper or research can be judged on its own merit rather than judged based on the motivations of the entity funded it.

Re: Undercover Activists Buy Off Professors in Climate Sting

#15
post #6
post #3

Hm, I feel like this is way less sinister than it sounds. From what I know of his prior reputation, Will Happer has long made his position on climate change clear, so it's not like he changed his mind when people offered him a big pile of money. If you already believe something and someone is going to give you money to promote your views, why on earth would you say no?

1) Intentionally hiding the source of funding; aka taking a bribe. 2) Intentionally publishing in a sham journal to avoid peer review. These are both tolerable behavior in the free market, but ought to be firable offenses for university professors.

Hiding the source of funding doesn't seem like the worst of issues, although it certainly makes some research look suspect for its partiality. The worst part is avoiding a good journal. For some professions, just publishing in a sham journal can be pretty harmful for one's reputation...hence the reluctance many have for publishing in open access journals.

Re: Undercover Activists Buy Off Professors in Climate Sting

#16
post #3

Hm, I feel like this is way less sinister than it sounds. From what I know of his prior reputation, Will Happer has long made his position on climate change clear, so it's not like he changed his mind when people offered him a big pile of money. If you already believe something and someone is going to give you money to promote your views, why on earth would you say no?

My thoughts exactly. If someone were to phonily offer Hawking a cartoonish sack of money to write a report about black holes, should we be shocked when he shows interest in the offer?

Re: Undercover Activists Buy Off Professors in Climate Sting

#17
post #6
post #3

Hm, I feel like this is way less sinister than it sounds. From what I know of his prior reputation, Will Happer has long made his position on climate change clear, so it's not like he changed his mind when people offered him a big pile of money. If you already believe something and someone is going to give you money to promote your views, why on earth would you say no?

1) Intentionally hiding the source of funding; aka taking a bribe. 2) Intentionally publishing in a sham journal to avoid peer review. These are both tolerable behavior in the free market, but ought to be firable offenses for university professors.

I can't comment on the other parts of it really (and I don't know the whole story so I reserve judgement), I'm just skeptical of the claim that he was "bought off" - which would imply that he changed his views because of the money. If the headline were, "Professors agree to hide source of funding and run a climate change journal with lax peer review standards", then I might hold off, but then again, that probably wouldn't look as sexy in a headline.

Re: Undercover Activists Buy Off Professors in Climate Sting

#18
This seems a bit like the Planned Parenthood tapes: approach someone with false pretenses, and then report the things they say in the worst possible way.

I would find it much more damning if they found a professor that would change their position for money, rather than finding people that will accept money to forward a position they think is correct.

Re: Undercover Activists Buy Off Professors in Climate Sting

#20
post #3

Hm, I feel like this is way less sinister than it sounds. From what I know of his prior reputation, Will Happer has long made his position on climate change clear, so it's not like he changed his mind when people offered him a big pile of money. If you already believe something and someone is going to give you money to promote your views, why on earth would you say no?

The problem is not that Will Happer's positions, nor is it even that he accepted industry funding for his papers laying out those positions.

> In Happer’s case, investigators said they were part of a “Middle East oil and gas company” and asked to ensure that their commissioning of the report could not be traced. Happer reached out to a friendly Exxon lobbyist who suggested channeling it through Donors Trust, the shady donor anonymity organization that has been called the “dark-money ATM” of North American conservatives.

The problem is the deliberate process of hiding conflicts of interest and of especially hiding funding from foreign organizations.

> Clemente referenced past articles and even testimony in front of state legislatures and said, “In none of these cases is the sponsor identified. All my work is publised as an independent scholar.”

At the very least, it should be illegal to not disclose such conflicts on interest when testifying under oath.

Post reply on HN