I’m dismayed to see this, but not at all surprised. People (like Jeff, like me) who own businesses and are self employed while trying to raise family have it tough in this economy. If I didn’t have guest posters, and help with moderation, I couldn’t keep WUWT alive. I also understand Jeff’s frustrations with unruly posters. My only saving grace is that I had 25 years experience in TV news dealing with the public and the inevitable emotional BS that comes with highly charged debate.
Jeff has made a powerful contribution to the climate discussion, the most important of which is the publishing of a solid rebuttal of the Steig et al paper which used mangled Mannian math to smear warming on the Antarctic peninsula all over the continent, giving a false impression of continent wide warming. Even Steig himself agrees with the rebuttal.
Let’s not forget the pivotal role TAV played in Climategate as well.
Please take a moment to wish Jeff well, and to thank him for his contribution here.
Jeff, the door at WUWT is always open to you. I give my sincerest wishes for health, happiness, and success to you and to your family. Enjoy your retirement.
– Anthony Watts
Here is his post:
Posted by Jeff Id on January 21, 2011
Update:
There is a lot more I could say about this group of people who have read and commented here. I know of very few unmoderated blogs which have been able to maintain such a civil tone through such controversial subjects. That says a lot about the quality of this group. Of all things, I think that is what makes tAV special. The world is a rough place and when I sat down one sunny Saturday morning to start this blog just over two years ago, I expected very little. In the end, tAV contributed more to the discussion on a truly global scale than I had ever imagined.
I may be back after some time off but it is better to let readers know where I’m at.
Best regards to all.
============================================
On the SOP thread we got into too heated a discussion. I’ve had more than my fair share of the public lately and don’t know when tAV will be back.
Of all the elements of the periodic table stupididium is the most abundant. The idiots pushed me over the edge tonight. I’ve had well enough of people who think they know — well anything — yet don’t have a clue. The blog has been very much entertaining and I’ve appreciated the technical contributors very thoroughly. I may continue someday in coming years but at this point… I’m done.
I’ve spent two years of my life in climate science, digging fairly deeply – I think you’ll agree. My conclusion is that those who believe they know believe for unknowable reasons. This includes BOTH sides. In what I believe is the rarest of cases, the middle ground is the correct ground and that is where the climate battle lies.
I don’t know if I will post again here, it has been fun though. Thanks to all who have been supportive and thanks to the guests.
Jeff Condon
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
I would very much support what has been said here and in particular Steven Mosher’s comment. The blogosphere has a huge potential for good. In many respects it can potentially throw the idea of the academic conference open where people close to and sometimes not so close to a given piece of research pitch in their ideas, ask the awkward questions and in so doing push the debate forward. The problem with the blogosphere is that too many just rant, vent their spleen and hurl insults. As Steven rightly says it is worth doing some of the basics, about doing some research and then, if appropriate making a comment. I also strongly dislike the shield of anonymity – I understand in the febrile world of climate science that it might be necessary for some to remain anonymous but it does seem to me that it is those who have something really worthwhile to say who are most prepared to put their name where their mouth is.
Thanks Bob,
My view on all this from when I first started this blog is simply this:
Anonymity breeds contempt
I love the fact that tAV was for all practical purposes unmoderated. Loved the discussions. Change – it happens.
Jeff, I hope you stay in the game a little bit !!!
Great work !!
Thank you for all the hard work, Jeff. You have made important contributions to the Climate Science debate and you can be proud of what you have accomplished.
Well done over many years Jeff. I am sad to see Air Vent close, but it has done a lot of good in the struggle against darkness and evil.
ntesdorf
Jeff. while tAV was not an everyday stop for me, it was a weekly visit, mainly to catch up on the mathematics side of the debate. You always made the programming mathematics verbally easier to understand than a lot of other bloggers. As I was just getting up to speed myself at the same time you were, it was easier reading your blog than trying to wade through some of Steve MacIntyre’s without a roadmap. Thanks to you the Air Vent became my map to following Steve as he kept his eye on the climate pea.
Sad! But other bloggers are appearing all the time. It’s a hard and lonely fight for sure with no government funding. The truth will out in the end, be patient all.
Jeff,
Although I did not spend a lot time at your place, links from WUWT occasionally took me there.
Best of luck to you.
See you on the flip side.
John
The war has been won. Thanks soldier. Just some cleaning up to do now, and some shivering as playfully expressed in the latest Global Warming ditty: http://www.minnesotansforglobalwarming.com/m4gw/2011/01/three-below-honey-1.html
-=NikFromNYC…BornInStPaulMN=-
Jeff,
Thanks for your good efforts and time and civility!
Steve,
I understand where you are coming from, but is it not acceptable to comment on the political or economic side of this issue, regardless of my understanding of the science?
While I’ve spent a fair amount of time studying politics and economics in general, not so the science of the global warming / climate crisis du jour issues. I’m barely scratching the surface, really.
In any case, I’m just wondering if the political/economic side isn’t just as important as (if not more so than) the climate science. Seems to me there’d be little debate on this subject if statist politicians and their ilk weren’t trying to ram through sweeping regulatory changes in the name of saving the planet…
Oops, sorry, my bad, I meant Steven (I have a brother named Steve… :D)
“On the SOP thread we got into too heated a discussion. I’ve had more than my fair share of the public lately and don’t know when tAV will be back.
Of all the elements of the periodic table stupididium is the most abundant. The idiots pushed me over the edge tonight. I’ve had well enough of people who think they know — well anything — yet don’t have a clue.”
It would have been much better if Jeff did not let the idiots know that they had won. This will encourage know-nothings to foul up other blogs. An example of shooting first, aiming later, imo.
Jeff let comments go through without moderation, which encourages idiots to comment. The National Review approach of moderating comments until you have proven yourself to be a mature commenter is a good approach. If shutting down tAV means that Jeff spends more time writing climate science papers, that would be great. I will be amazed if Jeff doesn’t resurrect tAV quite soon but even if he doesn’t he can always guest post at WUWT.
Jeff, have a nice http://www.wee break. Your tiredness and shell-shock is clear but your contribution was priceless.
You deserve a well-earned break and no one is able to predict how long it will last for. You’ve done your bit, you may even do more in future but that’s for the Gods to decide.
Thank you Jeff, if only your detractors had a pound of your intellect or an ounce of your integrity then they’d be worth listening to.
As much as they may be somewhat cheered by your current withdrawal they will be less happy that there are many others who will fill the gap.
They will be further dismayed by the possibility that you may rejoin the affray in future.
Once again, many thanks.
Jeff,
I never commented much over there, but I did pop by from time to time. It sad to see you go. Be sure and make some guest posts here or some other place. Your contributions to society are immeasurable.
As to the rest of the stuff mentioned here, like the call for civility and more thoughtful posts, IDK, I’ve a different perspective. There are many skeptics and many different roles for skeptics. To be sure, without the contributions of Jeff, Anthony, Steve Mac, Mosh, Willis, and the like, we’d be in an entirely world right now. But, we should remember, this is an unseemly marriage between on-line discussion and scientific discussion. There are different norms for each. For instance, I cut my teeth on geek(computer science) chat room discussions. Comparatively, this is Sunday school. If you don’t believe me, go to one and make a statement of the superiority of MS Sequel over Oracle or the other way around. Its amazing how otherwise dispassionate people could have emotional attachments to the way data bits are arranged. I find myself, from time to time regressing to the more base form of on-line communication. It isn’t intentionally mean, in some places, the lack of aggressive assertions is seen as a sign of weakness in the argument. Also, as one would imagine, many of those people are quite clever with finding information. Anonymity is essential in those arenas. Not just for an on-line presence, but personally and professionally. As to looking at the data before opining; I used to try. It isn’t feasible to run down the data to every incredulous and wild assertion put forth by the alarmist crowd. There are just too many. More, I believe for some, to take seriously enough to dedicate more than a few minutes of snide sarcasm is to confer a bit of legitimacy to them where they have none due. The assertion behind this action would be a great example. We have different roles, and the roles change for different people. Norms are different and reasoning behind opposition to the alarmism is different. For example, I really don’t care if we’re warming or not. That isn’t why I’m here. I especially don’t care if the arctic melts or not. That isn’t why I’m here. And, it isn’t just me. There are thousands here for the same reason. The reason I’m here, quite simply is because I find the words of Samuel Adams, Patrick Henry, Nathanial Hale and the like to be truer than the words of Hansen, Mann, Jones and the like. There is no amount of heat, real or imagine, no amount of melting real or imagine, hurricanes or tornadoes, or whatever dire predictions coming from the never ceasing attack of the totalitarians that would convince me that acquiescing essential liberties would benefit mankind. While we are indebted to the people I’ve previously mentioned, so too, are they to the people such as myself.
Arrhhhggg!!!! It doesn’t matter how many times a person reads his/her own post before posting.
real or imagined
While I don’t ever remember posting at Jeff”s A.V, I did visit it on a regular basis, It will be missed, all the best in the future Jeff and thank you for your time and effort.
This may raise the ire of some, but this could be considered an opportunity to overcome human nature’s tendency toward tribalism.
If someone at RealClimate ever declared an end to their blogging based on exchanges in a thread, and then deleted the entire thread (as opposed to closing comments), the motives for doing so would be examined and the action likely condemned.
If we hold “our own” to a different (lower) standard than we hold the “other side” then we fall into the same traps that led the climate alarmists astray.
It requires discipline to be objective when dealing with the tribulations of “a friend”, but we should realize that the climate alarmists feel the same way when they perceive one of their own to be under attack. If we expect them to rise above those feelings and advocate for honest and complete disclosure, we should expect the same from ourselves.
I missed it. What was the SOP thread about?
Jeff, thanks for your efforts at tAV, for your ice animations, and for our past discussions. I’m sure I’ll find you around the blogosphere.
Regards
You will not know what SOP was about gcapologist, because it was apparently deleted…
REPLY: His house, his rules, his right to do so.
I posted the following in another thread where I first saw that Jeff was leaving the front lines for a well deserved rest.
INGSOC says:
January 21, 2011 at 10:27 am
I will join with others in wishing Jeff a pleasant well deserved break! I would leave him with this quote; “Any activity becomes creative when the doer cares about doing it right, or better.”
Rest well.
I would add a further hope that he keeps an eye on things, and puts an oar in from time to time. We can ill afford to lose him.
I cut the SOP thread because wordpress had some rare technical problems, not because of the thread. I tried to do several things to edit and it wouldn’t allow them. After half an hour I simply deleted the otherwise inane post – wordpress allowed that. No important content was really lost. Was it a technical thread with useful stuff, it would still be there.
Wordpress is the finest blog medium available in my opinion and blogspot isn’t even close, but WordPress isn’t perfect.
REPLY: Jeff, you don’t need to explain anything. I’ve had WP posts go screwy on me too and had to start over. Sometimes copy/paste inserts code that renders the page inoperable in the editor. Now go enjoy your weekend or I’ll fly to Chicago and kick your butt. 😉 Anthony
re: “his house, his rules, …” , I didn’t claim he had no right to do it, I claimed that if someone at RC had exercised their right to do something similar it would be justifiably criticized. I suspect everyone here knows this.
My point is that lack of consistency in how such actions are viewed, depending on whether it is a “friend” or “foe” who does it, leads to (or is evidence of) tribalism.
If we agree that tribalism is bad, we need to be on guard against perpetuating it ourselves. That’s harder and less comfortable than pointing it out in the “other side”, but perhaps more important.
If we find it hard to question that decision by Jeff to delete the thread, how can we say that climate scientists should question actions by their colleagues?
NikFromNYC says: January 21, 2011 at 3:12 pm
I don’t believe this. Not yet. The advent of blogs of integrity and quality like tAV, and the miracle of Climategate, mark the end of the beginning, not the beginning of the end. Why just today my email from a natural medicines group is talking about the corruption that has happened over the last ten years in Science. But actually the roots are quite a lot older than that. Decay starts the moment one loses sight of the human beings and the sheer mystery and wonder at the centre of Science. Our world is changing fast and we need to change at depth ourselves, to meet those changes.
Surely blogs are essentially the new journals that can practice both openness and accountability. But I still think the meaningful next step here will be to develop a wiki alternative to Wikipedia, where the science can actually be explored and distilled, unlike WP which has “No Original Research” in its core setup. IMHO it’s a big step for Science to take, to make science wikis workable as well as open – but it would also be a gift to the future and one’s grandchildren. Interest groups gradually constellating by subject, and distilling the real new knowledge. My Climate Wiki vision is still alive though currently hibernating – can be essential for the growth and rebirth of vision.