After a she made a contentious comment about WUWT and me personally on another blog, I reached out and had a nice exchange a few weeks back with Georgia Tech’s Dr. Judith Curry. In that exchange she discussed the possibility of doing her own blog. I offered my advice. I’m glad she chose wordpress.com as I suggested, as it will ensure a more reliable experience than blogger.com or self hosting.
As you see above, this week, she took the plunge.
Her blog is at www.judithcurry.com which I’ve added to my blogroll.
I welcome her and look forward to reading what she has to say. If past missives have been any indication, she’s likely to bring the lightning her way.
Read her first post here
From a purely utopian standpoint, I do like this “blog rules” item of hers, which is rather unique:
If you make a mistake, acknowledge it. Email me if you would like a “take back”, which is strikethrough of your comment that absolves you from any further expectation of defense or discussion of the comment.
It will be tough to make it happen in the first place and to enforce that after the fact though, as I’ve learned here at WUWT that some people have a hard time giving up on entrenched arguments, and will take any mistake, real or imagined, and turn it into a weapon of derision for months or years to come.
Putting a strikethough in something said on her blog won’t prevent Climate Progress Real Climate Open Mind DeSmog Blog Climate Depot other bloggers from taking “offending words” and turning them into weapons of derision. /sarc
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
“The blogosphere has untapped potential for educating the public”
Should one laugh or cry when reading this?
So,,, Judith is entering the fray by making a foray into blogdom. Good stuff!
Anthony: Take heed of what Tallbloke is implying!
(“Foray” is the wrong word; “Fray” is wanted.)
REPLY: It was intended as pun, TB got a chuckle, but since it appears not everybody gets it, I’ll make it “fray” too 😉 -Anthony
I’m really glad Judith’s made this leap. More than any other climate scientist, Judith has made the effort to connect with the science-sceptical community. On her blog Judith promises to continue that effort and I think we, as science-sceptics, should embrace the endeavour and vigorously encourage her accordingly.
It’s interesting that you categorized her as Lukewarmer rather than Pro AGW.
REPLY: That’s my view of her position. If she wants me to change the category, I’ll gladly do so. – Anthony
Visit and be nice.
ask tough questions and listen.
Has anybody seen ‘Invasion of the Bodysnatchers’?
REPLY: ah, ah, ah, no finger pointing! – Anthony
I say give Ms. Curry time with, say, thirty years and an infinite source of papers in any -ology and let the data explain the certainties of world-wide climate. This mis-use of C02 forcing as a warming progenitor and subsequent need for countless trillion quid re-shuffle is high scam, but don’t go looking for any appointee to address the glaringly obvious discrepancies between observation and adopted policy. Oh no – We understand enough to cite impending catastophre.
Was it never thus?
Please be nice/polite to Judith..
I have come to realise she has the very best scientific intentions..
Everyone here, may not agree with her on many things…
But by the shear amount of grief and vitriol poured onto her, by the commentors at RealClimate, Stoat (Judith Curry jumps the shark), Deltoid, and many other, shows she has an open mind, particulary after she challenged them to read.
‘The Hockey Stick Illusion’ – A W Montford – aka Bishop Hill blog.
To quote Bishop Hill. (a good sense of humour)
“Judith Curry has decided to formalise her longstanding campaign to get people on both sides of the global warming debate to fling foul abuse at her. Her new blog is called Climate etc .
Welcome to the blogsphere Judy!”
http://bishophill.squarespace.com/blog/2010/9/11/judy-blogs.html
Lets us very sceptical people of the CAGW delusion extend her the utmost courtesy, if ONLY to show up the other ‘extreme’ CAGW side of the debate….
AND, If the other ‘extreme’ side of the debate, then decides to be courteous as well (less they look bad) then we have all won, at least to the extent a civilised debate can start…
Possibly around these comments from a UK Member of Parliament, with respect to one of the ‘climategate enquiries, that is being used to sya, the science is vindicated…..
‘THAT IS JUST NOT SCIENCE, BUT LITERATURE”
this SHOULD go down in history
(ref Briffa and the fact that not even Briffa/CRU could reproduce his OWN results)
MP Graham Stringer in full…
He is important, a member of the House of Commons Science and Technology Select Committee questioning Lord Oxburgh (Oxburgh Climategate enquiry)
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/09/10/oxburgh_science_select_committee/page2.html
The Register:
Stringer says the practices exposed at CRU undermine the scientific value of paleoclimatology, in which CRU is a world leader.
“When I asked Oxburgh if [Keith] Briffa [CRU academic] could reproduce his own results, he said in lots of cases he couldn’t.
“That just isn’t science. It’s literature. If somebody can’t reproduce their own results, and nobody else can, then what is that work doing in the scientific journals?”
————————–
Some comments and analysis of the above at Harmless Sky blog.
Lord Oxburgh caught in the headlights
http://ccgi.newbery1.plus.com/blog/?p=327#comments
Josh (cartoons) has a new one as well… (Judith Curry – backing up Andrew Montford)
http://bishophill.squarespace.com/blog/2010/9/12/josh-40.html
Roger @ur momisugly 8:11 am
Nope, ‘foray’ is appropriate and correct. It’d be daft to mount a ‘fray’ which is your implication.
Anthony(?)
You mentioned ‘a contentious comment about WUWT and (you) personally on another blog’. I think your mentioning it here warrants providing a link so that we can all see it. After all, you are asking us to accept Judith with open arms.
REPLY: Fact is, at about a month ago, I can’t recall exactly which blog and which thread it was on. Might have been Bart’s or Kloor’s, not sure. I did a cursory search here, but the email is at my office and I don’t feel like driving over there on a Sunday morning. Maybe later.
Also, I said nothing about “open arms”, that’s your take, my take was “simply announcement and welcome”, (note the tag) as a professional courtesy. Had it been fully “open arms”, I wouldn’t have called her on an unenforceable blog policy. – Anthony
Jackie says:
September 12, 2010 at 8:03 am
“The blogosphere has untapped potential for educating the public”
Should one laugh or cry when reading this?
My reaction was to roll my eyes and ignore the link to her public education site.
I get the feeling that Judith Curry has been set-up over the last couple of years to play the nice policeman role in the AGW propaganda blitzkrieg. Perhaps a soft female hand inside an iron glove will work more effectively than the Real Climate jackboot at educating the public.
———————
Anthony,
I remember it. I think it was at KK’s blog in the last month, not Bart’s. I don’t go to Bart’s anymore after VS left there except by reference from here, and I recently have been spending some time at KK’s, Let me search.
John
That is an interesting development.
I have been interested in her comments because she appears to be reasonably independent in her thoughts, even when she is at least a “lukewarmer” the entire time. One where she does not appear to be running on a “warmist ideology script”. That I think would be a good development indeed.
I agree that whatever she blogs, good or bad. They should be met with civil replies and reasoned thinking. The desirable outcome is to increase understanding on the subject of the climate.
However she will need good moderators like we have here, to weed out the “blog gatecrashers”. I hope she has prepared to protect herself and her new blog.
I hope Dr. Curry, that you take care of your newborn blog and nurse it along with trusted helpers to rational adulthood in consistency and be noteworthy for climate discussions.
If so you would then be only the SECOND AGW hypothesis-supporting blog that I will visit. I ignore all others because of their immature behavior. I despise blogs where the owner allows such rancor to continue unmolested and uses unfair and biased censorship of thoughtful counterpoints.
Wish you well, Dr. Curry.
Where is JO NOVA on Climate, Etc.?
Nice gestures and all…..why would I need to go to someone else’s blog when I can get pretty much all the references and discussions of the actual science right here at WUWT??
Via Tom Nelson a quote from 2006:
“Joe Romm brings a unique combination of expertises in climate science and energy technologies and policies to address the challenges of enabling a clean energy future and reducing our addition to oil. HELL AND HIGH WATER is an important and timely contribution that deserves careful consideration in the dialogue and debate on U.S. energy and climate policy.”
– Judith Curry, School of Earth and Atmospheric Sciences, Georgia Institute of Technology
Probably related to this:
“Third, “Hell and High Water, 2050-2100.” Sea-level rise of 20-80 feet will be all but unstoppable by mid-century if current emission trends continue. Some 100 million people will be displaced. All the US gulf and Atlantic coast cities will be below sea level and facing super hurricanes.”
Aw c’mon guys. I have always found her articles and arguments to be informative and indicative of someone who hasn’t taken an entrenched position.
Her first big post on here some months ago was very good. Many of us tried to punch holes in her statement but she responded well and gave ground where appropriate. Compare that with folk like GM and it should be obvious she is worth a few moments of interest at the very least.
—————–
Anthony and team,
Why categorize your blogroll at all? Certainly those who spend any time here are skeptical enough to sort out for ourselves, and newbies probably don’t come here by coincidence. We can find our way now, partly thanks to your longstanding venue and openness.
Imagine: The blogosphere squad car pulls up with its siren on. Over a bullhorn we hear, “Anthony Watts, put the categorizer on the ground, your hands in the air and step away from that categorizer.” The scene ends and it shows you walking serenely into the non-categorical night with a smile on your face. : )
John
REPLY: would it help if I added a “rant” category? – Anthony
Anthony,
In response to my comment above of September 12, 2010 at 9:41 am, you said:
” REPLY: would it help if I added a “rant” category? – Anthony”
Ahhh, maybe I am overly sensitive, but did you intend to categorize me by your comment?
Or are you making a generalized statement about some aspect of the type of rant blogs in the blogosphere or something?
I would appreciate knowing.
John
REPLY: There are some blogs that I don’t link to, because they fall into the “angry rant” category. That’s what I was referring to. By adding that category, I then don’t leave out a segment of the climate
rantoblogosphere- Anthony“Philip Thomas says:
September 12, 2010 at 9:06 am
Anthony(?)
You mentioned ‘a contentious comment about WUWT and (you) personally on another blog’. I think your mentioning it here warrants providing a link so that we can all see it. After all, you are asking us to accept Judith with open arms.
REPLY: Fact is, at about a month ago, I can’t recall exactly which blog and which thread it was on. Might have been Bart’s or Kloor’s, not sure. I did a cursory search here, but the email is at my office and I don’t feel like driving over there on a Sunday morning. Maybe later.
Also, I said nothing about “open arms”, that’s your take, my take was “simply announcement and welcome”, (note the tag) as a professional courtesy. Had it been fully “open arms”, I wouldn’t have called her on an unenforceable blog policy. – Anthony”
Thanks for your reply.
My suggestion of ‘open arms’ was meant to indicate our forgiveness. If Judith has made contentious comments about WUWT (a site we know and love) then I do not think we should be directed to her site without some knowledge of the nature of her slight against us.
I appreciate your attempts to provide the link and look forward to it but won’t be visiting her site until that time.
Re: John Whitman—
“Why categorize your blogroll at all?”
The categorization saved me a lot of time that I would otherwise have wasted separating the wheat from the chaff. This is the first ( and likely, only ) topic where I bother with “blogs.” As one who is skeptical of all things Internet, if the first “blog” I encountered had displayed genuine foaming-at-the-mouth ravings ( a la Romm ), I’d have rolled my eyes at the confirmation of all I suspected of the “blogosphere” and seriously contemplated ending my experiment.
There are all sorts of funny views on cAGW that pop up on here from time to time (and not just the trolls).
I wish her good luck. She seems a nice lady.
But if she starts waving shrouds around to justify spending a gazillion dollars on technology that doesn’t work, or promoting cap n’trade, the gloves will be off & she can get ready.
Malaga View says:
September 12, 2010 at 9:17 am
“[…]I get the feeling that Judith Curry has been set-up over the last couple of years to play the nice policeman role in the AGW propaganda blitzkrieg.”
Well make that Grabenkrieg. (trench war) A Blitzkrieg is something *fast*.
As long as she does not engage in censorship. If she does, she will certainly fail in my view. Civility should be paramount in the discourse, which she has indicated is important . Both lessons learned from WUWT’s success. I am concerned that Malaga View September 12, 2010 at 9:17 am is correct.