Boreholed

Gavin tests the new moderation que at Real Climate. Hmmm....what was that famous saying by Will Rogers again?

Jeff Id was trying to defend his paper on Antarctica (O’Donnell et al) at Real Climate. This is what he got for his trouble. Red lines mine.

Meanwhile the dhogazas of the world run free in the same thread:

Clearly, in the eyes of the RC moderators, skiing on Mt. Bachelor and discussions of mass delusion from a friendly but obnoxious regular are far more important than discussing the actual science and the analysis issues with a co-author of the paper being critiqued.

This sciencey entertainment is from a new feature at RC called The “Bore Hole” which is a place they put “undesirable” comments.

Bad move fellas. I predict this feature will become the most popular fixture at RC as people compete to have their comments boreholed. It’s like a sport now.

In case you have not read it yet, this story shows what our government funded employees do while on the clock:

RC’s duplicity prods Jeff Id out of retirement

While I fully understand the need to keep unruly posters from taking over threads, you guys at RC really owe Jeff and Ryan O’Donnell an apology.

Advertisements

  Subscribe  
newest oldest most voted
Notify of
Bulldust

Is that borehole something like a memory hole?

Always remember to take a screen-shot of your comments at RC. Once you’ve submitted them, it’s the only SURE way to keep a record of what you ACTUALLY said before the RC moderators get their grubby little mitts on them.

pat

I have said it many times and I will say it again. The posters and contributors to RC are not scientists or even interested in science. Their concern about the environment is extraordinarily weak. What they really are concerned about is bizarre politics that involves such as them controlling the lives of everyone on Earth. Period.
They suffer a mass delusion of authority that tempers every bit of sophistry that is posted.

Jim Steele

Of all the moderators Jim Bouldin is very fair and keeps discussions on topic. He will often chastise or delete personal attacks like dhogaza is prone to do. I am not sure who the big offenders are, but Bouldin is a good man, trying to make RC a place for respectable discussion.
On the other hand some moderators are very totalitarian allowing personal attacks when they like and deleting controversial . I had some of my replies allowed. Then Tamino or Ladbury will give a denigrating reply, and then all further response by me will get deleted, or moved. The scary things is they think and are blogging about how scientists like themselves should have more political power. Based on their biased underhanded methods of handling controversy, if they ever get any political power it will be a dark day for democracy and free speech as well as scientific inquiry.

Does anyone still go to RC?
Really?
Why?

vigilantfish

Unfortunately, the pleasure of reading the comments at the Borehole will drive up RC hits (first time I’ve been back there in ages). The boreholed comments are very revelatory of RC sensitivities as many of the deleted comments are totally moderate, or show honest bewilderment about RC ‘scientific’ arguments.

Lew Skannen

I have stacked up a few copies of War and Peace, Gone with the Wind and Encyclopedia Britannica to read while I wait for the apology to be published…

Magnus A

LOL
Statistics from Alexa:
http://farm6.static.flickr.com/5100/5427216974_dc49a350e3_b.jpg
I guess RC got to do as they always has done, if their “scientific” mission depends on their “methodology” (dodgy communication methodology).

Brandon Caswell

I think we are running into the root problem here with this issue.
It reminds me of the Jehovah witness’ that come around and want to talk about god. In the end it really doesn’t matter what you say to them, because they don’t listen to what you say. They look at you as an unenlightened person who is in need of their help to see the light. No matter what you say you get the same answer in return, simply because they feel they know more than you and it is their spiritual mission to direct you to think like them.
No matter how much time and effort is spent trying to draw attention to errors on their part, you will accomplish nothing. This is because they truly dont care if there was errors as long as the message was right. They are so busy looking at the big picture (AGW) that it annoys them to be criticized about small stuff.
This why you get things like the steig paper. They simply try different methods in statistics until they get the answer they wanted and quit trying. It might never occur to them, a result of to long with buddy review, that they might be challenged on their methods later.
They are so used to never being challenged by an adoring media and gushing peers, they never expect someone to want to prove their work wrong. The purpose of their science is to get the “right” answer. It is simply the right method when it produces the answer you already knew to be right.
Or to be brutal in analysis, they have forgotten what real science is and react agressively when somebody tries to reintroduce science into their sandbox.

Bulldust

Jay Currie:
I go to RC once in a while for a giggle. While I am not qualified to speak on the intricacies of “climate science” being discussed there, I skim through the green text (replies from the site kommissars) to see what outrageous statements they have made that week.
They are quite fond of tossing insults at people they disagree with and I find that behaviour far more telling than anytyhing else at the site. Surely “Real Scientists” do not communicate that way in public?

hunter

RE: ‘Borehole”
That is the best name for the south of end of the mule RC has become I have read yet.

Saaad

I completely agree that the borehole is already by far the most interesting and illuminating feature at RC. I wonder if it’s possible to treat it like a kind of proxy “open thread”, where you can discuss topics in the borehole by leaving a comment on a main RC thread in the certainty that it’ll end up in the borehole….if you see what I mean.
I predict it’ll be gone in a matter of days, if not hours. Which will be a shame. I’d love to see their viewing figures over its lifetime…..there might just be a discernable trend.

jae

Popcorn time, again. Love it.

STEVE

I have tried to post a number of times requesting Eric to advise if he is prepared to counter Donnelly’s post – no can do – they are stopping all comment.

Mick

re Gavin pic:
Gavin testing the “China-Syndrome” or is that an escape plan?
LOL

juanslayton

Gavin tests the new moderation que…
Should this perhaps be queue?

John Trigge

If anyone is relegated to the bore hole, please have a look around in the dark, damp depths and see if there is any data or methodologies lying around that many have been asking for for a long time. This may be where they are hidden.
There could also be some missing heat down there – let Mr ‘travesty’ Trenberth know if there is.

RACookPE1978

juanslayton says:
February 7, 2011 at 8:30 pm (Edit)
Gavin tests the new moderation que…
Should this perhaps be queue?

?Pour queue, mi amigo?

Steve Oregon

Well I’ve skied Bachelor, skied Timberline and played with Gavin and company.
Although many, in one particular discussion Gavin apparently didn’t like the way the path of the discussion was going with his regulars. I made a post and Gavin [without mention] editted out a sentence, another partial sentence and changed it’s emphasis and meaning. After his regulars easily jumped all over that post, which Gavin had altered, I found I was blocked and unable to respond. His regulars then proceeded to declare that I had run away empty headed and defeated.
All of my following posts were blocked.
That’s Gavin Schmidt.

cohenite

Jeff Id is back blogging; who said RC was good for nothing.

juanslayton

racookpe1978
?Pour queue, mi amigo?
Para evitar burlas de las calientistas : > )

kadaka (KD Knoebel)

Gavin Schmidt and The Bore Hole.
….
Well, no denying that’d be a source of Anthropogenic Warming.

NikFromNYC

Does mean they now publicly archive all comments at RC?! Even death threats, swear words, trade secrets like Google’s algorithm, or maybe just links to opposing facts? Or is it yet another means to show off the worst of the undesirable comments from immature skeptics? This would rapidly become sport for the usual kind of Leftists who fake “hate crimes” many times a year. It will be like fake Tea Party members waving racist signs around. Wouldn’t it be *so* nice though to have a huge archive of valid comments that they have disappeared?
There was an attempt that continues, to do this very thing: http://aicomment.blogspot.com/
‘An Inconvenient Comment’

Ray

Excellent picture… a [snip] in a borehole. LOL

Ted

Anthony.
At last something really entertaining and informative over at Gavin’s RealClimate. Ive just spent an hour there with a big smile on my face. there are tons of intelligent climate wise folks, who are throw into the Borehole on a daily basis. Some are funny, and most are simple trying to contribute to a one way mirror with well thought out science and observations. But Gavin is a hard task master and takes no S##T.
I do intend to visit the Borehole often from now on.
Here is a small sample of the Borehole classic comments:
——————————————————————————–
So, rather than deleting comments that question your “consensus” they now get put in a thread.
Sounds like real climate progress to me.
——————————————————————————-
There is finally something worth reading on this site: The Bore Hole! I might even have to bookmark this website now…wait…no, never mind.

tommoriarty

Last year I left a comment on RealClimate that was technical in nature, with a bit of math, 100% on topic, but critical of a RealClimate position. The comment referred to one of my blog posts that elaborated on my point.
Naturally, my comment was deleted.
Nevertheless, some RealClimate readers happened to stumble upon my blog. They made comments referring to me on the same RealClimate post where I had left my comment. I was referred to as a liar and a fraud. Their arguments were insulting, specious and dimwitted. Yet that seemed to be fine with RealClimate.
You can read one of my subsequent posts, where I include a screen shot of my comment to RealClimate and my responses to the RC commentors that so profoundly misunderstood my simple math here…
http://climatesanity.wordpress.com/2010/04/27/rahmstorf-2009-response-to-realclimate-comments/
Tom Moriarty
Climate Sanity

Rich Horton

I gotta think its Ockham’s Razor time here. It makes much more sense to just say the RC moderators are simply incapable of understanding Jeff and Ryan’s paper or points derived from it.

RACookPE1978

juanslayton says:
February 7, 2011 at 8:47 pm (Edit)
racookpe1978
?Pour queue, mi amigo?
Para evitar burlas de las calientistas : > )

See, sea. Las burlequesas tiene muchas calisthenics calientas …

Northern Exposure

Only one word comes to my mind with the mention of RC:
Sanctimonious
(note the capital ‘S’)

juanslayton

racookpe1978
Ay, eye give up…

Mark T

Not sure why anyone that doesn’t buy into their m.o. would even bother trying to post at RC. Their habit of snipping comments, selective editing, and outright modification of views they disagree with is well documented. Either the echo chamber doesn’t realize, doesn’t care, or is simply complicit with the tactic doesn’t matter. They will not get the whole story so any attempt to defend a point of view is purely a waste of time at best. There is no upside.
Mark

Frank K.

Jay Currie says:
February 7, 2011 at 7:42 pm
Q: Does anyone still go to RC?
A: I don’t.
Q: Really?
A: Yes.
Q: Why?
A: Because I value my sanity.
Really, I’m starting to think that maybe they’re trying to increase their own pathetic web traffic by pulling stunts like the Steig criticism and goading people into defending Ryan and Jeff at their site. Just ignore them, and let them wallow in their bore hole.
Real Climate has never been about climate science, but rather about making certain petulant and insecure climate scientists feel good about themselves…

ImranCan

Censorship is one of the last refuges of those who know they have lost. If they were right, why would they ever need to censor ANYTHING ?

Martin C

I wonder if this is RC’s attempt to get more traffic on their site, and to try and catch up in the site visit stats. People will go there to read the borehole, and some to post in order to get into the bore hole. At least for a while, until the novelty wears off . . .

My thoughts exactly Anthony.
If gavin had any brains he would let skeptics post whatever drivel they wanted
and he would send the bores on his side to the borehole.

SSam

Real Climate of Hostility to Facts and Open Discussion.

David Ball

” The time for honoring yourselves will soon be at an end “- Maximus

Sully

It took me only four or five visits to Real Climate a couple of years ago to realize that the moderation was heavily skewed to one side. Better to not educate them since such heavyhandedness costs supporters, it doesn’t gain them.

David Ball

Steven Mosher, if I am not mistaken, there is a jab at Anthony’s readership in your post @10:04. Please explain. All post make a contribution, even if they are incorrect. In my opinion, this is lost on Gavin. It is the failures and mistakes that help find the true path. Censorship is a road to nowhere. The wheat must come with the chaff, or no wheat.

Someone needs to write a Firefox add-in that records your comments when you post them at certain sites.

UK Sceptic

RC plumbs new depths of hubris. Who’da thunk it?

Orkneygal


Steve Oregon says:
February 7, 2011 at 8:42 pm
Well I’ve skied Bachelor, skied Timberline and played with Gavin and company.
Although many, in one particular discussion Gavin apparently didn’t like the way the path of the discussion was going with his regulars. I made a post and Gavin [without mention] editted out a sentence, another partial sentence and changed it’s emphasis and meaning. After his regulars easily jumped all over that post, which Gavin had altered, I found I was blocked and unable to respond. His regulars then proceeded to declare that I had run away empty headed and defeated.
All of my following posts were blocked.
That’s Gavin Schmidt.

Had virtually the same experience.

Atomic Hairdryer

On Schmidt going quote mining..
“When I said the science isn’t settled, I didn’t mean S09. Now PLEASE Eric, pull me back up..”

jason

“So, rather than deleting comments that question your “consensus” they now get put in a thread.
Sounds like real climate progress to me.”
That was me 🙂

Scottish Sceptic

If you ask me, the real killer expose from climategate was that they ran realclimate.
It might have been wide known before, but it just made my skin crawl to think that any “scientist” could have got involved with such an obnoxious site.
Personally I think realclimate has done to climate “science” what Joseph Stalin did to socialism … they have turned the acceptable face of science into the unacceptable face of propaganda.
Realclimate = a small propaganda gain for the total loss of scientific credibility

David Ball says:
February 7, 2011 at 10:36 pm
Steven Mosher, if I am not mistaken, there is a jab at Anthony’s readership in your post @10:04. Please explain.
######
HUH?
let me put it differently. On both sides of the debate people say smart things and dumb things.
If gavin were smart he would delete the dumb things his side says, thereby giving the appearance that his side only said smart things. Get it?

Adam Gallon

The borehole contents is highly revealing. I reckon it won’t last long, as it shows that the vast majority of its contents are highly pertinent & polite questions, pieces of evidence that conflict with the RC stance.
I also see that comment 108 is Jeff’s from above!
Also
“116.[edit -keep on trying to sneak in off-topic snark like this, and all of your stuff will go straight to the borehole from now on–understood?]
The ‘snark’ is hardly off topic and only 1 in 3 of my comments makes moderation anyway so it isn’t much of a threat.
If you can’t handle reasoned criticism, you aren’t much of a scientist – whomever you are. Eric wouldn’t have written this.
Comment by Jeff Id — 4 Feb 2011 @ 4:59 PM”

Magnus

I found my way to WUWT after being moderated at Realclimate. I came there as a concerned citizen with what I thought were legitimate questions, and I was exposed to mr. Schmidt’s arrogance and sarcasm. He wasn’t answering my question, just trying to ridicule me for the audience of true believers of the holy God of CAGW. I was really surprised because my question was one that regarded a specific uncertainty and I just wanted to learn what RC scientists thought of it. That was clearly too much for the narcissistic mr. Schmidt who could feel a slightly uncomfortable feeling of anxiety which he promptly turned in to rage and attack. A great way to discharge feelings of uncertainty, but no way to act as a truth seeking, noble scientist.
I must say I am in awe over how little they comprehend from basic psychology. They behave like immature, sarcastic and aggressive bullies towards curious people who visit their blog. Then they get funding to hold seminars where they ponder “why don’t people convert to CAGW? Why are we not reaching out to audiences?”
Someone should just step in and say: “It’s your friggin manners and ignorance, stupid.”

Magnus

Steve Oregon says:
February 7, 2011 at 8:42 pm
Well I’ve skied Bachelor, skied Timberline and played with Gavin and company.
Although many, in one particular discussion Gavin apparently didn’t like the way the path of the discussion was going with his regulars. I made a post and Gavin [without mention] editted out a sentence, another partial sentence and changed it’s emphasis and meaning. After his regulars easily jumped all over that post, which Gavin had altered, I found I was blocked and unable to respond. His regulars then proceeded to declare that I had run away empty headed and defeated.
All of my following posts were blocked.
That’s Gavin Schmidt.
____________________________________________________________
The work of a psychopath.

Magnus

Frank K. says(among other things):
February 7, 2011 at 9:33 pm
Real Climate has never been about climate science, but rather about making certain petulant and insecure climate scientists feel good about themselves…
___________________________________________
QFT!