gross negligence, however, Lomborg's publication cannot fall within the bounds of this characterization. Conversely, the publication is deemed clearly contrary to the standards of good scientific practice. The DCSD cited The Skeptical Environmentalist for: Fabrication of data; Selective discarding of unwanted results (selective citation); Deliberately misleading use of statistical methods; Distorted interpretation of conclusions; Plagiarism; Deliberate misinterpretation of others' results. MSTI review and response On February 13, 2003, Lomborg filed a complaint against the DCSD's decision with the Ministry of Science, Technology and Innovation (MSTI), which oversees the group. On December 17, 2003, the Ministry said that the DCSD had made a number of procedural errors, including: Not using a precise standard for deciding "good scientific practice" in the social sciences; Defining "objective scientific dishonesty" in a way unclear in determining whether "distortion of statistical data" had to be deliberate or not; Not properly documenting that The Skeptical Environmentalist was a scientific publication on which they had the right to intervene in the first place; Not providing specific statements on actual errors. The Ministry remitted the case to the DCSD. In doing so the Ministry indicated that it regarded the DCSD's previous findings of scientific dishonesty in regard to the book as invalid. The Ministry also instructed the DCSD to decide whether to reinvestigate. On March 12, 2004, the Committee formally decided not to act further on the complaints, reasoning that renewed scrutiny would, in all likelihood, result in the same conclusion. The original DCSD decision about Lomborg provoked a petition among Danish academics from 308 scientists, many from the social sciences, who criticised the DCSD's investigative methods. Another group of Danish scientists collected signatures in support of the DCSD. The 640 signatures in this second petition came almost exclusively from the medical and natural sciences, and included Nobel laureate in Chemistry Jens Christian Skou, former university rector Kjeld Møllgård, and professor Poul Harremoës from the Technical University of Denmark. Legacy and later assessments A group of non-climatologist scientists published an article in 2005 in the Journal of Information Ethics, in which they claimed that most criticism against Lomborg was unjustified, and that the scientific community had misused their authority to suppress the author. The claim that the accusations against Lomborg were unjustified was challenged in the next issue (September 2005) of Journal of Information Ethics by Kåre Fog, one of the original DSDS petitioners. Fog reasserted his contention that,