UPDATE 03/06/10 2:36 PM I appear to have flipped the "not" in Ginger's post; my apologies. Ginger offers no evidence for why she thought it was Madsen not Thorsen and offers no reasons for why she switched to Thorsen. As corrected by Dan Olmsted, I note that she is not saying AoA would be posting on the switch, only that AoA would be posting on it (the missing money, etc).
Olmsted has not issued any corrections on the Thorsen matter, and JB Handley immediately went on the attack again today, working hard to cement in readers' minds the idea that Thorsen is still missing (he is not).
No original corroborating documents have been provided that implicate Thorsen. And the email documents provided by Handley from another site can also not be substantiated. The email address for Dr. Diane Simpson contained in the documents are not valid, although that may be for a variety of reasons.
Original posting from 03/05/10 around 10 pm, with changes in another color:
As we wait to see what AoA will do, I'll update you. In the comments of the last post, I offered various sites showing that it did appear that the reports of money missing was in overseas papers, but no names were mentioned. Having read the blog posts here with information regarding Thorsen's location, a reasonable reporter interested in the facts would do more digging and amend his report. He'd also provide original documenting information, too, right? Transparency and all. Oh, and since we're talking, I'd love to know all about the 131 hits for Dan at whale.to. Does he align himself with folks who deny the holocaust, believe in mind control, and all the other conspiracy theories over there?
I cannot confirm any details in terms of which researcher the papers in question are referring to. And let's say the facts, sketchy as they are, are accurate. Money was taken. This says nothing about the research itself. Now, Wakefield's behaviors of paying kids money for blood and not having full ethics board approval also says nothing about the quality of his research. The quality of his research does. Still stands.
If AoA continues to run these twin themes of Danish researcher renders research invalid but Wakefield is a prince among men, it will serve as further proof that reality-based reporting isn't their strong suit. Don't see anything needing alteration here.
At some point, reasonable people will see the light and alter their course. Research shows, though, fairly consistently, that people who have invested everything only to see it crumble will hold even tighter to their beliefs. Based on that, what do you predict AoA will do? If Ginger Taylor is any indication, I think we can all go to bed tonight knowing it will be more of the same tomorrow at AoA. Ginger Taylor originally reported information on one researcher, then amends it to another, but says it changes nothing. It doesn't matter; she and other loyalists to the vaccine-autism theory decided it was something in the vaccines that did it, and it really doesn't matter if it's thimerosal, if it's the MMR vaccine, if it's some other component. Doesn't matter. Doesn't matter what the research shows because it's all a government and industrial conspiracy to harm children. Doesn't matter what the folks who are trying to cure and recover their kids do, either, because they are saints who just want to save the kids.
My point remains: AoA, its writers and its loyal readers are not interested in science or in truth. They do not admit to mistakes. They do not correct them. They keep marching on.
If it turns out that one of the researchers absconded with money, I'll note it here. If a study is debunked or overturned, I'll report on it here. And if I screw up, I'll own it.