Jo Nova needs a little help

Her “big oil” money apparently ran out. /sarc She writes: 

I received a strongly worded email today from a long time loyal reader complaining that he almost missed this request which I placed at the bottom of yesterdays post.

more…

http://joannenova.com.au/2014/03/an-offer-i-couldnt-refuse-jo-nova-gets-outfoxed/

I’ve sent my help along in addition to this post.

About these ads

84 thoughts on “Jo Nova needs a little help

  1. Anthony, you are brilliant! This is most helpful, just wait til people see what is coming. I’m sure they will be delighted to know they helped make it possible. Just wait…

  2. Done!

    Thanks for letting us know Anthony! I was at JoNova earlier today and didn’t see the notice. I used your link to return and buy chocolate support.

  3. You can not just donate to someone in Australia. It must be to an “authorized” charity or group advocated by the government. So a private person doing what Anthony and Jo do for the betterment of all can not be donated to in that country.

    Sounds like the government wants to keep people from speaking their mind and working to stop their foolish agendas with heavy government monies and heavy regulations. And if you dare to question them they will come after you to silence you. (sounds like the US as well in many respects).

    I do like the resourcefulness however… hmmmmmm chocolate……. a good product to use too..

    Here is to your success!

  4. Regarding the “donation” button. I notice that SkepticalScience is allowed to use a “Donate” button. https://www.skepticalscience.com/donate.php
    Perhaps John Cook is registered, though the about page says it’s a personal site….

    My paypal account and all the funds in it was frozen without warning at one point, and I was informed by Paypal:

    “We have been notified that you may not be a registered non-profit
    organisation. The use of the PayPal donation button is reserved for
    registered non-profit organisations only. Please remove the donation
    buttons from your website if you are not a non-profit organisation.
    If your organisation has registered as a non-profit charity/tax exempt
    organisation with the state or federal government, please provide us with
    documentation of this via the Resolution Centre. ”

    Hm? Perhaps paypal need some kind of notification?

    PS: NGR – Jo most certainly does love the chocolate (the darker the better, thank you!) but even more than that she loves being able to spar in this strange game of mental tennis…

  5. Anthony

    This raises a serious question that sceptics seem reluctant to confront.

    We are woefully underfunded and under resourced. Every sceptic I know of has to fund their own projects and have jobs unrelated to their interest in climate.

    It takes me a year to research my large articles. Who funds me? No-one. Can I afford the time and money? No. Could I do more if BIg Oil funded me? Of course. But they don’t, because money from this source for sceptics is completely imaginary.

    How can sceptics get hold of medium term funding in order to progress the aspects of climate science that ‘official’ researchers don’t seem to want to tackle? I don’t know.

    Perhaps an article here might be useful as a motivation for us to collectively brainstorm on how we can obtain regular funds, so we can put our sometimes sceptical view of climate science onto a firmer footing that doesn’t live hand to mouth all the time and takes a more organised approach to querying some of the material that constantly emanates from well funded organisations that follow the IPCC line..

    tonyb

  6. You talked me into it. Much as I hate PayPal in many ways, the ease with which it enables a small donation…..sorry, “purchase” to be made all the way across the world has had me supporting causes I am ashamed to say I would otherwise not have bothered to support just because of the hassle.

  7. Climatereason makes an interesting point.
    I spend far more time than I should reading about and commenting on the vexed subject of the politics of “climate change”, the production and use of fossil fuels and the misapplication (mostly) of renewable energy and, while I am acutely sensible and appreciative of the role that fossil fuels play in holding our civilisation together and our continuing need to exploit them for the foreseeable future, I am still no fan of oil companies or mining companies or , probably, anyone who might conceivably fund me to do what I do.
    Plus, once you take someone’s shilling….you lose your total independence. That does not have to be an entirely bad thing….but I think I would struggle on without.

  8. I just bought some chocolate via PayPal but was disappointed it was only a one dollar shipment.
    Should I have been able to change the sum to a larger one? Anybody know?

  9. Mike Lowe
    I used PP and adjusted the one dollar to my donation. There in the quantity add what you wish then hit update.

  10. “… brainstorm on how we can obtain regular funds …”

    We could instigate a global tax on something, say fresh air, perhaps. It could be “revenue neutral”, apart from overheads and any interest that accrued, of course. The rate would start out low and be gradually increased over time. The degree of “revenue neutrality” could be adjusted according to circumstances. If things were “worse than we thought” (when are they ever not?) then an upwards adjustment could be appropriate. Then we could be self-sustaining.

    Oh wait, the UN has already thought of that …

  11. Just bought a few chocolate bars. I’m not allowed to eat them (that’s what happens if you over-indulge for many years), so i think I’ll send them to Jo. She’s a national treasure.

  12. Just sent her and David $1000. Let’s get with it, folks. They were instrumental in getting rid of the carbon tax and those behind it. 1K isn’t pocket change for me. Let’s dig deep, Jo and David are worth it. If no us, whom?

  13. “michaelspj says:

    March 13, 2014 at 3:36 am”

    The “proice ohn cahbon”, in Aus, is still in place. AU$1K, is well beyond my ability, I applaud you!

  14. climatereason says: “We are woefully underfunded and under resourced. Every sceptic I know of has to fund their own projects and have jobs unrelated to their interest in climate.

    It takes me a year to research my large articles. Who funds me? No-one. Can I afford the time and money? No. Could I do more if BIg Oil funded me? Of course. But they don’t, because money from this source for sceptics is completely imaginary. ”

    They prefer to give their money to politicians and PR firms, not to research. That Big Oil does not fund research suggests that even they think mainstream science is solid. Even if they had a minor bit of doubt, it would pay off for them to fund science big time. They would fund you and more likely real researchers to show the gaps. Universities get funding from companies for a large range of other research topics.

  15. Jo’s supporter has offered to donate in proportion to our contributions. I dithered. I’d already decided the best action on my behalf was to set up a small ongoing contribution. Should I change my mind, and give the year’s donation at once?
    I have decided that I will still go with the small, ongoing contribution. What michaelspj says is ‘not small change’ for him is a whopping great amount compared to what I am able to contribute. What I can afford is embarrassingly small. I’m embarrassed to mention it.
    But here’s my reasoning: I’ve long wanted to be able to contribute regularly to Steve McIntyre, whose contributions to Climate Science have done so much to bring reality back to the debate. I’d like to be able to donate to Anthony’s blog, which gives me the intellectual excitement I used to get from New Scientist, before they became ‘Non-Scientist’. I want to be able to contribute to Mark Steyn’s legal expenses and force the exposure of Mann’s taxpayer-funded hidden writings. But waiting to be able to afford to make a big contribution has not been a successful approach for me or them. So,I’d like to begin now with a ten dollar a month ongoing payment to Jo.
    However, here’s the rub: I can’t work out how to set up an ongoing arrangement.
    Advice from anybody would be much appreciated.

  16. climatereason

    why not try crowsourcing? put a project together and see if people will fund it?

  17. Jaunty cyclist

    Crowdsourcing. Excellent idea. How would one go about it and what would sponsors expect in return? Anyone got experience in funding projects?

    tonyb

  18. I literally have nothing to give, however iirc she is running her own dedicated server right?
    if US hosting is ok she may want to look at datashack.net as they have really good prices for unmanaged (you do it yourself) dedicated servers with a free directadmin control panel license.
    I use them for myself and people I support.
    just a thought on how she may be able to save some $$ if someone has a way of getting the info to her.

  19. I gave something. And everyone has Jewish family members – all humans are simply cousins of varying degrees :)

  20. @ Poptech
    I first heard about the claims of anti-semitism yesterday. Jo has already addressed that slander.
    Here’s the lead of her response:

    David Evans (my other half) pointed out that anyone who opposed the regulating class gets called a racist sooner or later (see those quotes at the end). Now it’s happened to him. Two weeks after getting a mention of climate “feedbacks” into The Age, he’s being called antisemitic. And on what basis? Wait for it… two years ago, on a different topic, Dr David Evans wrote the word “Rothschilds”. Then those who can’t think, but were keen to do a character assassination, leapt to use their psychic abilities, crack secret codes, and drew on their best kindergarten reasoning to call that “antisemitic”. The essay was about banking history and systematic flaws in our currency system, and there was no mention of any religion or any race. But no matter, it’s just another variation of the pathetic Holocaust denier meme. It’s what a smear-artist does — denigrate speakers to try to stop people hearing their message.

    http://joannenova.com.au/2012/08/compulsive-namecallers-nutter-conspiracy-theorist-anti-semitic-denier-trying-to-censor-through-denigration/

    Unless you have material not addressed here, it seems to me that you owe her and David an apology, don’t you?
    Do you have a response?

  21. Leo Morgan,

    Jo hates asking for money but her readers like to give, it’s just that often we just keep putting it off unitl she gets desperate and thats not fair for the amout of work she puts in. I think the choice of the tip jar and a suscription button would be a good idea.

  22. Done. There was no suggested amount so I did $20. Jo, it’s OK to suggest an amount to help us gauge the need so we can respond accordingly.

  23. Poptech says: March 13, 2014 at 9:22 am

    …these entertained comments…

    Poptech, you blew your cool and went ad hominem crazy…and lost a lot of respect in the process. Your comments were rightfully criticized and subsequently had to be edited. NOBODY wants to read that kind of juvenile rhetoric…and you owe JoNova an apology for your behavior.

  24. Bought Jo some chocolate a couple of days before the offer to match, so went in yesterday and bought her a little more.

    Mmmm, chocolate!

  25. Yep, I also helped along Jo’s chocolate collection. I was happy to help when her last PC fell over and died and more than to help her now. If only she had access to all that mythical ‘Big Oil’ money sloshing about…lol. Jo is a credit to climate skeptics; she’s erudite, informed and always brings her humour to her writing. I really wish she’d hurry up and write us all a book, though!

  26. Happy to see that several people here see and get what Poptech is up to. Shameful Poptech. Really shameful. You should be offering a heartfelt apology with your tail tucked firmly between your legs.

    I’m donating.

  27. Poptech says:
    March 13, 2014 at 7:10 am
    ——–

    You’ve really gone too far this time Poptech. Pull your bloody head in mate.

  28. Poptech, please take that stuff elsewhere. As I explained to you privately, you are off the mark with Jo in your particular interpretation of her comment.

  29. Leo Morgan says:
    March 13, 2014 at 4:30 am
    ” So,I’d like to begin now with a ten dollar a month ongoing payment to Jo.
    However, here’s the rub: I can’t work out how to set up an ongoing arrangement.
    Advice from anybody would be much appreciated.”

    You can set up a PayPal account (free for paying out) and instruct it to make a monthly stipend to Jo’s account. The account of your choice will be debited and you will be emailed each time. Great for me as my memory lapses come too fast and furiously now.

  30. Poptech says:
    March 13, 2014 at 9:22 am

    Leo, it is not that but these entertained comments,

    http://joannenova.com.au/2014/03/climate-change-denial-and-the-holocaust-allusion/#comment-1396979

    =====================================================================
    I worked with a man for several years that was in Dachau. (He wasn’t a Jew. He was an Italian POW who had previously escaped from other camps before he was sent there.)
    Ask yourself, Did she “entertain” those comments or just allow them? Maybe so they could be exposed?
    Maybe she made a questionable or even bad call in allowing the thread to go where it did, but did she actually endorse what you are objecting to?
    If all Anthony allowed was opinions he agreed with then where would WUWT be?
    Don’t help if you don’t too, but cut her some slack and don’t attack if she may not be the enemy.

  31. Jimbo, I take it you do not have Jewish family members and apparently you do not understand the severity of what I was criticizing either. I am not apologizing for criticizing the allowance of Holocaust denial / Neo-Nazi comments to remain. It appears I will have to handle this in other ways.

  32. Jimbo and the rest did not see what Crakar posted before his comment was snipped not deleted and him banned. Instead my comments were censored.

  33. re:Mike Lowe says March 13, 2014 at 1:56 am
    I just bought some chocolate via PayPal but was disappointed it was only a one dollar shipment. Should I have been able to change the sum to a larger one? Anybody know?

    Easy enough to change the “1” to a “10”, then proceed to “log” into PP and complete the transaction … did just that a few minutes ago with total success …

  34. Donation made. Yes: donation. A hundred quatloos!

    I do not care about the laws of another country. It is my money to give, and if I think that Mr. Benjamin is better off in Jo’s pocket, that, to me, is free speech. [Although if questioned by the authorities, I shall claim that I only bought her some chocolate ☺. That’s my story, and I’m sticking with it!]

    x x x x x x x x x x x x x

    [PS: Poptech, some friendly advice: stick to what you’re good at. You are very good at compiling searchable information and references. But sometimes you get a little off-track, that’s all. ☹ ]

  35. Poptech says:

    March 13, 2014 at 7:10 am

    I’m not giving anything, I have Jewish family members.
    =======================
    This was your first comment on the thread, it came out of nowhere.
    Made me think………. where did that come from ?

    Now that I sorta know where it came from, I think you are just trying to poison this thread.
    Start your own blog, maybe then you might expel the bile, I hope so.

  36. Jo used to send me emails like you do Anthony and she changed this, so I don’t often now go to her blog. Not because I don’t like the blog, on the contrary I thought it was great, just I am out of touch, and can not spare the time to contribute to you and local papers.

  37. Poptech says: March 13, 2014 at 4:04 pm

    Jimbo, I take it you do not have Jewish family members and apparently you do not understand the severity of what I was criticizing either. I am not apologizing for criticizing the allowance of Holocaust denial / Neo-Nazi comments to remain.

    That you elected to sully this thread in the first place with your petulant, juvenile, self-serving crap was bad enough. That you now want to double-down on your crap in suggesting that former supporters of yours must be holocaust-ignorant/insensitive because we don’t buy into your strawman crap is almost beyond belief.

    This is NOT about JoNova’s “allowance of holocaust denial”. That is YOUR issue. OUR issue AND JoNova’s (among others) is your resorting to juvenile, persistent ad hominem name calling and your refusal to moderate that rhetoric despite pleas from supporters of yours (now considerably fewer) and Jo herself to do so. Your juvenile petulance resulted in compelling Jo to lock further comments in that thread.

    Shame on you for that.

    Were I Anthony, your initial post here would be removed as well as all responses to it.

  38. Jim, do you believe Holocaust denial comments are appropriate and should have been allowed to stay? I had no idea that defending the legitimacy of the Holocaust could be construed as “juvenile” or “self-serving”. I have no qualms with being accused of calling those who make light of the Holocaust names – actually I relish in it. I wish my snipped posts over there were let through so you could read how I really feel. The fact that you are defending such behavior speaks to your lack of integrity not mine. Maybe if you had Jewish family members and personal friends who lost family to that tragedy would you begin to understand.

  39. Gunga Din: “If all Anthony allowed was opinions he agreed with then where would WUWT be?”

    It would be RealClimate.

    Poptech: Get over yourself.

  40. Poptech is way off base, Both he and his protagonist to Jo Nova’s thread had gone way off topic so both parties were snipped. But only the comments made AFTER Jo Nov wrote in-line to say the thread was not for debating the Holocaust. She made the point that she hasn’t studied the exact number of Jews killed in the various camps versus in transport, or in ghettos or at the hands of the Nazis, it was all an atrocity. Poptech got into a debate with another contributor about just how many Jews were killed in the Holocaust, and in Auschwitz specifically.

    Jo Nova made the point that it was an atrocity, no matter how many Jews suffered. But the topic was not appropriate for discussion and if it continued, comments would be snipped. Poptech and his protagonist both had a number of their posts snipped.

    Now it seems Poptech wants to claim censorship or worse, at Jo Nova’s blog site because his inappropriate blogs were sot shown.

    Because of continued attempts to post material at that thread Jo Nova has removed the thread altogether! So we are now all the losers.

    It does sound like Poptech has reason to be upset with the Holocaust, but he shouldn’t let that cloud his judgement regarding Jo Nova and her team of volunteer moderators.

  41. Hi There, this is Jaymez I have just posted the following at Jo Nova’s blog:

    Well done people. I am please to say that you have all proved me right.

    There are many hundreds of us who value the work Jo does on this blog and only need to be asked when she is short of funds to keep up her great work.

    What you have done, and by what I hope others will continue to do, as there is no reason to stop just because my limit of matching contributions has been reached, is ensure Jo can work for the next few months without financial stress. You have confirmed my faith in human goodness and I know you have re-inspired Jo Nova.

    Today I cheerfully transferred $5,000 to Jo Nova’s bank account. I only wish I could afford to give more.

    I trust Jo’s loyal readers and contributors can keep building her chocolate fund, and will rise to any future calls when she is in need.

    Congratulations!

    The minute Anthony posted the call, contributions started coming from the US and Canada and other parts of the world. True Allies with the Aussies – well done!

  42. When I saw Jo’s call, I posted a note to Anthony in “tips”. Whether it was mine of someone else’s notification is immaterial, but ..

    ….I would really like to thanks all the WUWT climate realists for getting behind Jo, and helping her keep her blog going.

    Congrats to all. :-)

  43. James, it always makes sense to remove an entire blog post instead of the two racist off topic comments that were causing the problem.

    My judgement is based on hypocritical claims of free speech while my comments were censored. You cannot claim the racist comments are free speech but mine criticizing these are not.

  44. Well, Poptech, at least you’re more upset by those who would deny and/or abuse “The Holocaust” than the ADL is.
    But, again, I implore you to give Jo a break on how she handled things.
    Sometimes when you try to put a fire what you want to save gets wet.

  45. Poptech says:

    March 14, 2014 at 12:51 pm
    =========
    After totally disrupting a thread, you leave a comment that is gibberish.
    Well done.

  46. Poptech says:

    March 14, 2014 at 5:44 pm

    u.k. I am not surprised you are unable to follow conversation. Maybe learning how to read would be a start.
    =======
    Give me a link to a different forum, so that we might continue the discussion.
    I have the feeling our time on this forum/thread is just about finished.

  47. That’s not the way it went down. Further comments were stopped at the same time for all. You are just miffed that you didn’t have the last word. I don’t know what you are worried about, as far as I could tell there were no supporters for the view which so upset you. But you have upset a lot of people by having a go at Jo and suggesting she in some way supports anti Semitic views.

  48. James, please don’t pretend to know what the problem was. Two Holocaust denier comments were allowed to remain and multiple of mine in response were censored. Instead of removing the two offensive comments the thread was initially locked and now the whole thread was removed, instead of just deleting the offensive comments. That makes no sense.

    All I know is those comments were allowed to stay based on an idiotic free speech argument, which is hypocritical because many of my comments were censored. If you don’t support offense remarks you remove them from your site, not dance around a hypocritical free speech policy where the comments attacking the offensive remarks are the ones being censored.

    REPLY: gawd, you’re never happy. It makes perfect sense; Jo is exhausted, and it was easier to delete the thread than wade through all the comments. As I told you she was exhausted to tears and she’s pretty well fed up with the entire issue. People that want to criticize how people like Jo and I run our blogs should walk a mile in our shoes and experience the abuse we get daily from all sides and the stress the toll takes on us when we have people that threaten to do nasty things to us if we don’t change something, do it a certain way, etc. I had years in broadcasting and media, so I have a thicker skin, but there are even days when I feel like the abuse is too much.

    The issue is OVER, so no further comments on this will be posted. Good day sir.

    – Anthony

Comments are closed.