I am not sure it is worth beating this dead horse any further, but I will make one final observation about Lewandowsky. As a reminder, the study purported to link skeptics with belief in odd conspiracy theories, particularly the theory that the Apollo 11 landings were faked (a conclusion highlighted in the title of the press release).
Apparently the study got this conclusion based on a trivial 10 responses out of hundreds from folks who self-identified as skeptics, but due to the horrible methodology many not actually have been such.
But here is the interesting part. Even if the data was good, it would mean that less than .2% of the “skeptics” adopted the moon landing conspiracy theory. Compare this to the general population:
A 1999 Gallup poll found that a scant 6 percent of Americans doubted the Apollo 11 moon landing happened, and there is anecdotal evidence that the ranks of such conspiracy theorists, fueled by innuendo-filled documentaries and the Internet, are growing.
Twenty-five percent of respondents to a survey in the British magazine Engineering & Technology said they do not believe humans landed on the moon. A handful of Web sites and blogs circulate suspicions about NASA’s “hoax.”
And a Google search this week for “Apollo moon landing hoax” yielded more than 1.5 billion results. (more here)
By Lewandowsky’s own data, skeptics are 30-100 times less gullible than the average American or Brit.
By the way, I have spent a lot of time debunking silly 9/11 theories. Here is one example of a science-based response to the Rosie O’Donnell (a famous climate alarmist, by the way) and her claim that burning jet fuel can’t melt steel so therefore the WTC had to have been destroyed by demolition charges set by Dick Cheney, or something like that.