From: Damien Broderick (thespike@earthlink.net)
Date: Fri Jan 17 2003 - 17:32:52 MST
A legal friend writes:
====================
This does put rather a different light on things:
http://www.forsk.dk/uvvu/nyt/udtaldebat/bl_decision.htm
Incidentally, as I read it, Lomborg has technically been found *innocent* of
the charges. The Danish committees observe that publication of the book was
not good scientific practice, but it appears that their only job,
technically, was to find whether complaints of scientific dishonesty should
be upheld. The test for that has both an objective element about the content
of the material and a subjective element about the state of mind of the
researcher (requiring either deliberate dishonesty or gross negligence). The
subjective element was not found in this case. Thus, Lomborg has been
criticised, but not found guilty of scientific dishonesty.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Tue Jan 21 2003 - 17:10:21 MST