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.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
RC views censorship in the same way as some misguided mothers in a Roman Catholic co-ed high school school I taught in many years ago.
I was checking books in the school library that I could use as a resource, when I spotted a book on human biology/human development whose pages seemed strangely aligned. I opened the book where pages appeared to be missing and discovered the section on physical changes, including the growth of testes and breasts during puberty, had been razored out; I immediately took the book to the school Principal to alert him to the problem. He laughed and said that a few of the poorly-educated mothers thought that by this action, their kids would not read any ‘dirty stuff’; the mothers obviously thought that ‘behind the bike sheds’ or somewhere similar was the proper place for transmitting information about biological development. He said he would fix the problem by shining a light on it and posting some quality graphic posters on the topic on the library bulletin boards and invite the mothers in to tell them why the posters were there.
RC seems stuck in a similar pseudo-medieval mindset and I prefer not to go there.
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] edited 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.
===
What’s particularly galling is that these bigots are employed as scientists using public funding to spend their time maintaining this one-sided, non scientific PRIVATE web site.
Hopefully some of the legal procedures will eventually get them for fraudulent use of public funds.
hunter says:
February 7, 2011 at 8:00 pm
RE: ‘Borehole”
That is the best name for the south of end of the mule RC has become I have read yet.
===
Well spotted. There is nothing more pointless and boring than a “discussion” where one side is removed.
See the photo to see what you find when you look into a bore-hole.
Taken from “The Bore Hole” which was replaced there from a debate on Freeman Dyson:
“…maybe Dyson has a thing or two to learn about the biodiversity of unmanaged ecosystems.”
This supposes two mistaken views of ecology and possibly one ethical proposition. First, that “unmanaged” ecosystems are a viable option – which they are not; and second, that nature, sans humanity, would be in classical Clementsian balance. The mathematical approximations that “ecosystems” truly are far more variable, unstable, and evolving than the populist vision; this false idealization of nature “before the Fall” informs most environmental activists commitment to the cause, including combating man-made climate change.
Finally, there is the ethical view of eco-centrists that is straightforwardly religious: nature is best off unmolested by humanity. This view, while rarely shared explicitly, affects most public debates, including the one here.
Therefore there is another answer, given short-shrift here: that Dyson is not only pro-humanistic, but also understands ecology in its scientific sense as a limited field (for example, see R. H. Peters, “A Critique For Ecology”), and rejects its religious rationalizations. Hence, his skepticism of global warming alarm is consistent with these other scientifically informed views.
Comment by Orson — 7 Feb 2011 @ur momisugly 8:58 PM
This is laughable. Why not keep it in there?
Borehole? Well! Well!
Doesn’t stand up to investigation, quite appropriate for Gavin to be hung up in a mistake, really.
What is real climate?
Funny enough having read the comments about RC here, at CA and BH I have never been to the site as it seems to much like a cult vibe over there, same as Church of Scientology squashing all negative comments from the real world to keep the faithful blinded from the truth.
Cult – The word cult pejoratively refers to a group whose beliefs or practices are considered strange.[1] The word originally denoted a system of ritual practices. The narrower, derogatory sense of the word is a product of the 20th century, especially since the 1980s, and is considered subjective. It is also a result of the anti-cult movement which uses the word in reference to groups seen as authoritarian, exploitative and that are believed to use dangerous rituals or mind control. The word implies a group which is a minority in a given society.
I agree with Gallon. The “borehole” has many polite, thoughtful comments which happen to question the RC dogma. It confirms what most of us have known for a long time, which is that RC is biased in its moderation.
As for me, I don’t post on pro-CAGW blogs anymore because all of the ones I have posted on start censoring comments once they start losing the argument. At the end of the day, there is shockingly little evidence to support the pro-CAGW position. In short, the emporer is naked and people get pretty annoyed when you point it out.
If you question their scientific approach or have critical inquiery about methodology, you promptly get “boreholed”. Especially if you point out the fundamental weakness of computer models. If you talk to them about their own models, they gladly post it. They would like you to step out of the real world and into their virtual world of models where they dictate how nature is, how it will respond if you fart too much and how the weather will be on April 1st the year 3920. That’s where the geeky Schmidt is king. This is HIS world and where he has an awesome personality and is a favourite with the ladies.
In the real world, however, he is as geeky as he looks, and as insecure as he seems. The “bore hole” is continually exposing the fear and horror these men have of criticism. They’d rather we accept and watch their own horror productions: the virtual collapse of ecosystems modeled by computers. These are different varieties of horrorfilm plots written, directed and produced by the CAGW crowd and their computers.
Lindzen once compared them to little kids locking themselves in closets to scare eachother in the dark.
It might be Gavin sees his bore hole as a cursed empty place filled with nuthing but crap.
Maybe it’s a psychological thing this anathema of Gavin?
So, essentially, it could mean that to get boreholed by Gavin . . . o_O
A number of people, frustrated with trying to post their own comments at RC, have said “why bother posting at RC”?
I think the reason is self-evident from the response at RC and the need for them to create The Bore Hole. Every time they delete, snip or relegate to the borehole comments they don’t like their credibility is reduced. New readers to RC, perhaps unaware of its reputation, notice it. By not being open and actively censoring critical posts they are actually driving people away. By posting occasionally at RC we can help this process along.
Besides, I think its actually fun to watch the silly antics of RC moderators as they shoot themselves in the foot…again…and again…and again…
Actually, my final two posts last night to the Steig thread didn’t even make it to the bore hole with snips. They just vanished. I am very disappointed not to make The Bore Hole.
Always keep a copy when posting at RC. I paste mine and email them to myself (or cross-post at Bishophill or somewhere). I also take web page saves of the comments at regular intervals because they do have a habit of editing the posted comment list later.
I’m with Jay Currie. RC has sunk into oblivion, science-wise.
It already exists: the “Lazarus: Form Recovery” plugin recovers and stores all your writings in a searchable database. I never lost a comment since I installed it.
Why does anyone even bother with RC? They are closed minded and obnoxious. Let them silently slip away into oblivion.
Steve Oregon:
That’s appalling. I can hardly believe it. Do they have no shame at all at RC?
a borehole?
with whats dangling in it…it looks like an Aussie long drop sh*tpit:-)
On Thinking scientists comment above about his posts being removed (and not even showing up in the borehole), here is one of them…
“I am sure you do have a day job, as do many of us posting here and elsewhere. I am unsure what was insulting in the last post (I cross-posted in full at Bishophill by the way, so people may read it all there).
Perhaps you could answer some questions which arise from this post and the subsequent response by RyanO at CA:
(a) Would you consider it normal practice to be a reviewer of the O’Donnell et al paper when it critiques your own? Do you consider that to be a conflict of interest?
(b) How come you are now criticising a method in O’Donnell et al which as a reviewer you recommended and preferred?”
Obviously, these questions need answering. Steig’s earlier comment about making a point of not visiting sites like CA (Gavin calls it a ‘disinformation site’) is to simply keep the less curious from looking into the other side of the story. Therefore Real Climate is real science by real climate scientists. All others spread propaganda, focus on irellevancies and are politically motivated. This was also Gavin’s ‘excuse’ for not attending the Lisbon conference. But here we have a case where science is trying to progress and every step from the Team has been one of blocking, dodging, filtering, ignoring or cutting off completely. If those guys were truly scientifically motivated, Gavin and the other RCers would clear the space so these things could be talked about and dealt with. Yet here we are, again. And the comments just keep disappearing.
Here’s my post at RC:
“Can you please put a link to the borehole thread on your homepage? Finally, the general public gets to read some genuine scientific discussion on this website.”
“Lindzen once compared them to little kids locking themselves in closets to scare eachother in the dark.”
ROFL
Congrats, Mike, you’ve joined the “party”:
134. Hi, I hear from WUWT that there’s a real cool party going on in the bore hole, can I join? Comment by Mike Haseler — 8 Feb 2011 @ur momisugly 3:28 AM
Jeff Id is back blogging? RC karma well earned! The gift that keeps on giving.
I love RC. One of my favorite blogs. Know thy useful idiots!
I encourage everyone to visit. Often. Like beer drinkers to the loo. Don’t bother trying to comment, though. Thugs moderate the threads. Dissent is not tolerated. I’ve been banned for life since 2007. Don’t know why, really. Just wanted to disagree with something Gavin wrote, but that’s not allowed.
So much for civil discourse.
I first visited RC in 2005-06 or thereabouts, quite innocently checking out what all the hooha was about with this “Global Warming” thingamabob….. The thread was about Greenland and Vikings, and like a fool I dared ask a question about how the northern settlement could have had farms and cattle considering that now it is all permafrost, therefore it must have been warmer back then…….. Boy, wasn’t I sent packing!
….Which was a good thing ’cause I fled into the sanity and security of Climate Audit and an extremely interesting dismantling of a Hockey Stick….;-)
That photo of our Gav is photoshopped, I know this see cos it isn’t lined with mirrors.
Sorry- on my comment above, not Shmidt but Steig, and not disinformation but “dishonest or disingenuous with respect to the science”. Thanks to Barry for providing the actual quote, which is where I thought I’d read ‘disinformation’ a while back.