Here’s what you get to see at Open Mind
sHx | November 2, 2010 at 9:26 am
You know, Tamino, you shouldn’t be so shy about asking Anthony
Watts to place a permanent link to your blog at WUWT. Real Climate, Stoat and several other pro-AGW blogs are already prominently displayed on WUWT blogroll. So it is better to ask than to throw up occasional tantrums in order to draw his attention this way.
[edit]
[Response: It’s very revealing that when Anthony gets pwned, his supporters call it a “tantrum.” Nice rhetorical trick … but you guys just can’t take the heat.]
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
…and here’s the full comment, sans editing, that sHx left in WUWT Tips and Notes tonight:
sHx says:
For what it is worth, here is in full my snipped comment at Tamino’s “Can We Talk?” thread:
You know, Tamino, you shouldn’t be so shy about asking Anthony Watts to place a permanent link to your blog at WUWT. Real Climate, Stoat and several other pro-AGW blogs are already prominently displayed on WUWT blogroll. So it is better to ask than to throw up occasional tantrums in order to draw his attention this way.
WUWT does not fear losing regular readers and commenters to the CAGW camp, you know. Rather, Watts’ blog seems to thrive on the range of opinions and options it offers to its visitors, something pro-CAGW blogs across the board have failed to emulate. In pro-CAGW blogs one gets to see nothing but the established climate dogma. According to Gavin Schmidt of Real Climate, the refusal to reciprocate the courtesy of linking to such skeptical blogs as WUWT, Bishop Hill, Climate Audit, etc , is justified on the grounds that those blogs are “anti-scientific”. What is your excuse, Tamino?
You are aware that Anthony Watts publicly offered you a chance to guest-post on WUWT on several occasions. Unless you are afraid of being pilloried by members of your camp, there is absolutely no valid reason why you should refuse the invitation. You’ll have greater audience figures in WUWT than Real Climate, Stoat, Climate Progress, Deep Climate and your blog combined. All you have to do is ask in a civil fashion.
We can’t talk, it seems.
sHx says:
Ah, the link:
http://tamino.wordpress.com/2010/10/28/can-we-talk/
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
And here’s the result:
That was:
And I won’t even ask for a reciprocal link on his blogroll. That guest post slot is still open to Tamino by the way.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
How do we know Tamino, with another screenname, doesn’t comment here regularly?
Just look for an anonymous commenter here with the Tamino style and modus operandi, Voila!
John
Sam the Skeptic says:
“Why are they so angry when people (some better qualified than they are) don’t buy into all the scaremongering stuff?
Why are they so insistent — with very little, if any, real-world evidence — that they are right?
The more I read the more I fail to understand just where the warmists are coming from.”
The warmists, Sam, have an agenda that is nether scientific or realistic. Their objective, along with all their pals at the UN, WWF, EU, Greenpeace, etc etc, is to inflict fear and doubt amongst the general public throughout the planet, so as to impose more taxes, more financial clout and less freedom to the average Joe. They use all kinds of sinister tactics, and AGW is the best one they have come up with for a long time. Hence their incessant drive to try and maintain their momentum, and to change the goalposts when it suits.
As Vaclav Klaus said, not so long ago, “Blue Planet with Green Shackles”. Sums it up beautifully.
m the Skeptic says
“
Sorry, forgot to delete the tail-end.
I was on a pretty good run on having my posts appear in full on Open Mind, but this one on Tamino’s Can We Talk thread seems to be stuck in moderation:
Just The Facts | November 3, 2010 at 2:54 am | Reply
Your comment is awaiting moderation.
Tamino
Why do you edit certain posts such as sHx’s above;
http://tamino.wordpress.com/2010/10/28/can-we-talk/#comment-45332
and my post from a couple weeks ago?:
http://tamino.wordpress.com/2010/10/15/go-ice-go-going-going-gone/#comment-44877
If you want to talk, why are you censoring the conversation?
I am all for Judith but why have we got a whole post about a Troll? What next? “Come on Down Gavin”?
After the last few years, one thing I have learned is that it is a total waste of time trying to ever try to put our side to the ……(trying to not get snipped!) environmentalists.
Anthony has tried and been endlessly insulted! Media weather guys have had the same treatment! Over 33,000 scientists have had the same treatment! (Oops! I forget sometimes, they are not Climate Scientists!)
These guys have had a few months to get over the emails etc and are all coming back, having re-organized (with a few exceptions like Monbiot, who realizes the game is up)
Same old arguments, same old deletions to anything that does not line up with their agenda etc.
Its nice to point out their shortfalls on their sites but lets just stick to science here and leave it to good peoples common sense to spot the politics.
(That and a huge new lot in the house soon!)
I too made a sincere recommendation to Mr. Grant Foster (Tamino) that he accept Anthony’s invitation to post on WUWT. I pointed out that readers of both blogs would benefit from thoughtful discussion of scientific facts and resulting opinions. My post was derided for several days then removed.
I don’t link to Tamino because he is not honest. In my opinion RC and climate progress are in the same league. People or groups that will say anything to support an agenda don’t deserve the privilege.
Mark Wagner is proud to be a denier this morning.
Wow, reading ‘Open Mind’ reminds me of Top Cat (Tamino) and Benny (commentors)
Hilarious…….
There ARE two things… You just said “there is two things”.
Sam the Skeptic:
I don’t deny that it has warmed in some places, while it has cooled in others, and remained relatively static in yet others, over the course of the instrumental record. My problem with the whole debacle is that they’re saying it has warmed globally when that is demonstrably not the case.
Jeff Id says:
November 3, 2010 at 6:56 am
I don’t link to Tamino because he is not honest. In my opinion RC and climate progress are in the same league. People or groups that will say anything to support an agenda don’t deserve the privilege.
You said it so well I’ll just repeat it. They should be ignored.
jason says:
November 3, 2010 at 2:28 am
You can smell the fear. The warmists have staked everything on this scientific theory, and they can now see the possibility that its mostly natural climate patterns.
I think a lot of them knew it was natural all along and they were trying to get it all done and dusted before nature took its course and temperatures headed down again. We may have escaped by the skin of our teeth.
My comment on Open Mind, mirrored above;
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/11/02/the-full-tamino/#comment-522272
has been deleted. I will waste no more time trying to engage a condescending close-minded censor. Congratulations Tamino, you are dismissed…
I think you are all being unkind to Tamino – I think that for a 10 year old he is doing really well.
I have very little time for those who demand the right to be heard while reserving the right to censor.
Other than censoring outright trolls and spammers of course, but they are easily recognized.
Peter Plail says:
November 3, 2010 at 11:24 am
I think you are all being unkind to Tamino – I think that for a 10 year old he is doing really well.”
Please, let’s not insult 10 year olds. My neighbor is 9 and could argue rings around Tamino.
This is the sort of stuff that landed me at WUWT. I would read these climate blogs bashing blogs like Climate Audit and WUWT. From my life experience, people become start name calling and becoming aggressive when they know their argument is not robust. So, I ended up here, I found the discussions to be civil, and the topics enlightening. Personally, I think that the climate stations project is the single most important piece of work related to climate (no NSF grant needed). Because all of this business about AGW hangs on one thread…have we been accurately measuring surface temperatures?
“…
singin’ songs and a carryin’ signs
mostly say “hooray for our side”
…”
Nice link on the sidebar. Should be fun for Tamino to check his logs for the http referer (referrer) tags.
Peter Plail says:
November 3, 2010 at 11:24 am
However much people here agree with this comment and those like it, comments like these really aren’t any better than many of those on Tamino’s side. I think skeptics and AGWers alike can prove their points and the other side’s failures without personal attacks such as these.
At least if you’re going to do personal attacks, say something like “Tamino acts like a child when he uses the word ‘pwn’.”
Just my thoughts,
-Scott
Scott says: November 3, 2010 at 4:18 pm
“I think skeptics and AGWers alike can prove their points and the other side’s failures without personal attacks such as these.”
How? if all your points get removed or edited to look as weak as they can. I totally agree with addressing the argument not the person but someone like Grant.. is very hard work. (I think he got bullied out of the 13 year old RC clan… Joke!!)
As has been pointed out many times, Anthony has given Tamino a free opportunity to post here. If he is correct, and he can also get all his friends together to post supporting evidence, surely it is the perfect opportunity to post the best case possible to a very large group of mainly skeptic readers. Surely that is better than posting to a much smaller delegate of people who already agree with you?
so much negativity and bitching on the pro-AGW blogs (not that I havent been just as guilty in the past, but that’s mostly born out of frustration at being labled an idoit or denier or some such crap) – I really don’t get it.
Most people here don’t buy the offical line of tipping points and impending doom and are just after an honest appraisal of the facts and an open discourse to try to work out what’s causing what and further their understanding and further the science – you dont have to be a scientist to have a bright idea – someone else might take it and run with and prove the theory.
Somehow, the pro-AGW camp view this skeptical discussion as some kind of heretical rebellion that must be crushed at all costs without realising that if there was actual hard core bona-fide proof that our CO2 is causing panetary meltdown that most of us here would be ok with trying to find ways to fix it at all costs. However, given that actual cause-effect links and facts seem to be in rather short supply, the only thing they have left is pathethic sniping and bitching.
It really must be miserable being that miserable.
Jason S. says:
November 2, 2010 at 8:29 pm
Get the whole story at WUWT! Get half truths and panic-stricken rants at Tamino.
Nice.