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.
I can’t wait to be boreholed by those assh….
With or without the borehole RC is not worth even the slightest bit my time.
Wiglaf says: February 8, 2011 at 5:35 am
“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”
I wonder whether my previous comment a few days had anything to do with the creation of this borehole. It think it went like this:
“Come you global warmers, life on the outside is getting boring cause you lot refuse to come outside and play! Please buck up your ideas … and stop hiding … we need everyone of you out here because there’s now a serious shortage of alarmists to go around.”
Has RC ever been anything other than a psychophantic narcissistic collection of idiots? I ask genuinely, as I only visted it a couple of times, maybe a year or 18 months ago – and it struck me as completely censured with somewhat dogmatic explanations by the ‘staff’. Was it ever any better? Needless to say I have never been back and I am not interested in such behaviour.
Steven Mosher, I see you also completely missed my point. Everyone has something to contribute, whether you think what they say is dumb or not. WUWT? is successful because it is inclusionary, not exclusionary as is RC. Get it?
re: Bishop Hill, 11:19 pm
Bishop Hill says “Someone needs to write a Firefox add-in that records your comments when you post them at certain sites.
That would be great. When I comment on RealClimate I always make a screen capture of my browser, opened to the comment page with the RC URL obvious at the top, and the “waiting for moderation” note that accompanies my just submitted comment.
RealClimate has NEVER allowed one of my comments. I believe my comments have been sane and rational, but contrany to the slant at RC.
ThinkingScientist says:
February 8, 2011 at 3:41 am
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.
____________________
I can understand your frustration, but IMO it is a sign of high intelligence when you can write a question that is “not even boreholed”. It means they fear you.
Would it be possible for WUWT to make a link to the borehole so that the visits are reflected in WUWT hits rather than RC hits?
Just a thought…
Sigh, those people at RC……..don’t bother. Let them blather in their echo chamber. Their relevance isn’t palatable. Bore hole…..whatever. I haven’t been back since I tried to help them understand a graph in the M&W paper. A doltish group of people with obnoxious habits. I can take rude, and have a slight tolerance for stupid, but I cannot abide the double assault of rude and stupid.
@Tommoriarty
“RealClimate has NEVER allowed one of my comments. I believe my comments have been sane and rational, but contrany (sic) to the slant at RC.”
……been sane and rational…………. Well no wonder you they wont post your comments see 🙂
Anyone know if they’re hiring?
Orkneygal says:
February 8, 2011 at 12:11 am
Had virtually the same experience.
Magnus says:
February 8, 2011 at 1:11 am
The work of a psychopath.
P. Solar says:
February 8, 2011 at 1:34 am
Hopefully some of the legal procedures will eventually get them for fraudulent use of public funds.
Robinson says:
February 8, 2011 at 4:48 am
That’s appalling. I can hardly believe it. Do they have no shame at all at RC?
P. Solar has it right. It is fraud. It crosses the line.
Schmidt has plenty to gain from his deliberate doctoring of discussons to make them appear and develop into false impressions and meanings.
This pattern of egregious stunts that provide cover and insulation for his tax funded falsified science is just like other cover ups that have brought ruin to many.
[snip]
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.
At first, I was about to argue with you that it is not a mule, it is clearly a horse’s, um, “south end”.
However, I realise neither can be correct since you don’t get Bull, uh, stuff from either a mule or a horse and there sure is a lot of it there.
Just an observation.
a sample of comments RC sent to the BoreHole:
10.Oh and here is the evidence for excessive funding in climate research:
http://climatequotes.com/2011/01/08/how-can-climate-scientists-spend-so-much-money/
http://icecap.us/docs/change/Greenhousegasesclimate%20map.pdf
Comment by Jacob Mack — 8 Jan 2011 @ur momisugly 1:16 PM
114.This may not be the right site, but what I’m interested in are the effects of the warming. I have no major doubts that the planet is warming as is so well explained on this site, but is it yet as warm as it was ten thousand years ago at the end of the last ice age? and even if it is or will be does it mater much? I know there are books out there, just not a lot of info on the main climate sites, or maybe I havent looked hard enough. Thanks
Comment by Raf Val — 4 Feb 2011 @ur momisugly 3:14 AM
121.In a Physics Today essay linked in the Wikipedia entry on Judith Curry, she states that Steve McIntyre was unable to post on Real Climate when he was trying to defend his critiques of the hockey stick. I was wondering if this is true, and if so what the rationale was.
Comment by Richard Palm — 5 Feb 2011 @ur momisugly 11:51 PM
122.May I give my personal opinion about Judith Curry : from my point of view, the way she expresses her concerns about climate science is very close to the ideal scientific attitude, trying to be balanced and free from ideological a priori (this doesn’t mean of course that she is always right, although I did not notice anything wrong in what she said). This is not the case for many posters on this blog.
Comment by Gilles — 6 Feb 2011 @ur momisugly 3:01 AM
I openly invited the RC folk to come and put up their positions here on WUWT, having told them that this is a tolerant and stimulating place to voice one’s opinions.
There was a tsunami of “how awful WUWT is” and “they aren’t tolerant of me and they banned me”. I wonder if even one has been here and given us the benefit of their point of view?
I see vigorous , let’s say brutal, exchanges here backed up by references and data but it seems that as long as the ripostes are civil and lacking profanity they see the light of day on the thread. Those folk over at RC would find WUWT invaluable in sharpening and refining their arguments because there aren’t many fules or maroons over here ( present poster excepted of course *grin* )
A few years ago, when I was naive to their censorship, I visited RC to ask some perfectly reasonable and honest questions hoping for some “real” answers. To repeat an analogy I’ve made before about the experience, I discovered that RC is an alligator site – all mouth and no ears with an ornery propensity to attack any unwary person who steps into their waters.
If you look at the Alexa results for RC, their traffic is up by 41% in 2011. I’d say their method is improving their popularity in the short run at least. It’s only 1.41 times almost nill, but it is still an improvement…..
If they were actually regular about the way they boreholed people, we could probably get some resonable discussions working down there in the hole itself.
[snip – off color]
This is just flat out patheitc.
It would be beyond my web programming skills, but it ought to be possible to produce a proxy site for RC. Let’s call it TheRealRealClimate.com (TRRC). Every RC page would have a corresponding TRRC page. If you posted a comment at TRRC then it would be entered (automatically) as a comment at RC. But if RC moderated it out of existence (or even just edited it) then the original would remain on TRRC, but with color coding to indicate the fate of the comment. It wouldn’t be long before all of RC’s visitors migrated to TRRC.
There’s a potential copyright issue that could perhaps be overcome by embedding RC’s material in TRRC without actually copying it across [alternatively, simply put TRRC on a host in Moldova or The Ukraine and forget about copyright issues]. But (even) more of a problem would RC countermeasures — I’m sure they’d block TRRC’s IP address on the day it opened shop. But if TRRC was to proxy RC via something like Tor then that might make it hard for them to block.
In case you’re all getting a little, er, “wired” by all this…
Is there a direct link to The Borehole in the sidebar – yet?
.
REPLY: yes its been there awhile…see the colored inset in the post above – Anthony
So funny, the patience of some of the genuinely concerned punters, carefully reposting their earlier comment that didn’t appear, and their reposts go into the same bit bucket as the first! But seriously, what is the point now? Are they trying to claim “we don’t prevent contrary points of view, we put them all up” while at the same time removing them out of the relevant thread? Quite perplexing, I can’t figure why they would even do this, it just ridicules the whole point of having a comment mechanism to their stories.
See Borehole 123 “It appears my recent comment was not dispalyed. So I’ll try again.” And the post seems valid, on topic and not contraversial at all.
Go figure.
From _Jim on February 8, 2011 at 5:40 pm:
Also found is:
Could he have meant in the WUWT sidebar?
Might as well set the RC link right to the BH. People can still find the rest of the site if they really want to, otherwise people can avoid cerebral depletion while getting to the good stuff. ☺
+1 x 10^6
.