Apologies

…for the light postings the last couple of days. I’ve been traveling and in meetings with climate scientists about some upcoming important work.

I’ll have more on that later. Some very interesting news to report.

In the meantime, if you haven’t voted for WUWT in the bloggies awards, (see upper right of the sidebar) now’s the time to do so. I came back to discover that I had been slimed by paid political blogger Joe Romm at Climate Progress, who wasn’t nominated, so a sour grapes anti-vote is now afoot.

Here’s the details on the bloggies awards.

0 0 votes
Article Rating
44 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
February 19, 2011 8:39 am

[snip lets not go there with the labels, Romm does well enough on his own – Anthony]

Galvanize
February 19, 2011 8:54 am

I have just offered him some grapes…of the sour variety.

Dan Sudlik
February 19, 2011 9:01 am

Anthony, absolutely no apologies are ever necessary. You do God’s work in getting us the facts we need when we “discuss” climate change with our more liberal brethren.

February 19, 2011 9:08 am

Dirty tactics.. What would you expect! Anyway, I voted!

Traciatim
February 19, 2011 9:08 am

I kind of like to reduced posting schedule, it’s far easier to find time to read things properly when there aren’t 5 or 6 things piled up.

Brian H
February 19, 2011 9:11 am

The firehose hasn’t been at full pressure? I hadn’t noticed. It’s so hard, having a life and tracking WUWT comment streams. ;( 😉

Darkinbad the Brightdayler
February 19, 2011 9:17 am

They should perhaps draw a lesson from Egypt.
You just can’t shut people up or drown them out forever.
In the end, the attempt at suppression attracts more attention than ignoring would have.

Greg2213
February 19, 2011 9:41 am

Apologies?
No problem and no need for an apology. Slightly fewer postings give some of us a chance to catch up. 🙂
And yeah, I did vote. Can we give multiple votes to the same blog?

Jimbo
February 19, 2011 9:42 am

Apparently Technorati has put Romm’s Climate Progress blog under the ‘Green’ category. I wonder why? ;O)

bikermailman
February 19, 2011 9:59 am

Let me add my ‘no apologies required’. You’re doing work essential to fighting the warmmongers, and you (and your cob blogers) are much appreciated.

Zeke the Sneak
February 19, 2011 10:02 am

A note for Climate Progress:
The evidence is incontrovertible: WUWT is occurring. If people continue to read and enjoy this science blog, long term trends of detailed analysis, laughter, and alternative hypotheses are very likely to continue. We urge action by sending the check for $20.11 to Anthony Watts and awarding him the best blog award immediately. The 60,000,000 visits are settled, and the Surfacestations Project is historic.

CRS, Dr.P.H.
February 19, 2011 10:04 am

Apologies not needed, Anthony. We know how busy your life is, with family, business, this blog, Cub Scouts etc.! Travel safely.

BillyV
February 19, 2011 10:08 am

Reduced posting schedule? Hmmmm? Never noticed as I am always behind and try to follow each posting at least 90%, including the comments. Can’t imagine what your effort must be to manage this whole enterprise. Perhaps I can finally get to the top. Welcome relief. Think it is important for you to get out there and attend the meeting and see what is going on and represent this “small voice” which is trying to be hushed. Stop the guilt trip Anthony, you are in my estimation performing way above your pay grade.

tallbloke
February 19, 2011 10:09 am

I voted last week. Looking forward to hearing about developments on the science front Anthony. There’s been too much politics lately.

Gary
February 19, 2011 10:23 am

I’m always fascinated by the spewers of vitriol. They seem to have lost self-control and perspective to a gripping fear of some kind. The poor souls just don’t see how silly they look to the disinterested observer. Maybe their over-inflated sense of self gets in the way. And the asymmetry of passion between the so-called “haters” and the “hated” is telling as well. Although it is necessary to refute lies and guard against maliciousness, giving them attention is a pointless waste of effort.

Douglas DC
February 19, 2011 10:42 am

Voted too last week.

Mark
February 19, 2011 11:05 am

I voted and then realized a week later I never saw the confirmation email. I found it in my spam folder and clicked the link to make my vote actually register. Be sure to follow up with that last click if you haven’t already.

Iggy Slanter
February 19, 2011 11:08 am

Apologize? You? We are the ones who should be apologizing for not giving you more support for your heroic efforts. As for being slimed, well good. If you are not taking flack you are not over the target. All the best and many thanks.

Latitude
February 19, 2011 11:31 am

Romm complaining about WUWT being number 1 is like liberal radio complaining about Rush being number 1….
Neither one of them would even be on the air if it wasn’t for the government giving them our money to keep them on the air……………

Andy
February 19, 2011 11:49 am

I posted a comment on Joe’s article suggesting he was suffering from a case of sour grapes!
I’m sure my comment won’t get past the moderators, but at least Joe and his friends might have to read my comment. I just couldn’t resist having a pop at Joe 🙂
BTW: Never feel you have to apologise Anthony. Your work is outstanding – I know I wouldn’t be able to do it.

kramer
February 19, 2011 12:02 pm

[thanks]

DocMartyn
February 19, 2011 12:19 pm

“Gary says
I’m always fascinated by the spewers of vitriol. They seem to have lost self-control and perspective to a gripping fear of some kind”
We are between II) and III)
There are five stages in the Kübler-Ross model of grief and tragedy:
I) Denial—”We have a consensus and 99% of all scientist agree with us”
II) Anger—”You amateur keyboard warriors are hacking bastards who couldn’t understand a statistical model if it fell on you”
III) Bargaining—”Just let have a few more billion dollars and we will prove that Gaia is sick”
IV) Depression—”These attacks on science make me want to leave the field”
V) Acceptance—”Who could have known that the climate was so variable and that the models were unreliable. Gives us more money and we will find out where it when wrong; after all, we are the only people who unstand what happened”

jorgekafkazar
February 19, 2011 12:40 pm

Mark says: “I voted and then realized a week later I never saw the confirmation email. I found it in my spam folder and clicked the link to make my vote actually register. Be sure to follow up with that last click if you haven’t already.”
Thanks. I didn’t get a confirming note, so I had to go to the website and leave a message for the moderator. He sent me a note and let me know that he’d manually tallied my ballot.

Editor
February 19, 2011 12:49 pm

I’ve sometimes wondered what would happen if a viper accidentally bit it self. Yeah, I’m sure I could find the answer on Wikipedia, but it so much more fun to imagine Joe Romm accidentally biting himself in his frenzy, bloating up and turning puplish greem.

February 19, 2011 1:12 pm

You got my vote last week 🙂
Rgds.

BigOil
February 19, 2011 1:29 pm

Anthony, No need to ever apologise to us.
You have no idea how many of us are listening to you all around the world, watching and hoping, cheering you on.
The closest comparison I have is the BBC radio to occupied Europe in the second World War.
And look how the BBC has changed!!
Keep up the wonderful work. I just hope you get a Nobel prize for freedom when it is all over.

R. de Haan
February 19, 2011 1:50 pm

No apologies needed.
You’re doing a hell of a job and I admire you for it.

jasmr
February 19, 2011 1:58 pm

I voted last week… was tempted to vote with a couple of my other email addresses but didn’t want it to seem that there was stacking going on :-). I endorse the other comments about your commitment and indefatigable work Anthony (and friends). I looked at the stats yesterday and it seems there are about 60,000 visitors every day to WUWT can that be fed into the “best blog” vote somehow?

lapogus
February 19, 2011 2:46 pm

Anthony – no need to apologise, like others above I prefer fewer postings as it difficult to find time to keep up. Intrigued to hear what the developments are – anything to do with Svensmark and the CERN experiments? I seem to remember reading a comment over at BH that Nigel had said that they would announce news soon, but I could have been half-asleep and a dream. Like I say, it is difficult to keep up.
I voted last week. Lots of new snow here in the highlands, so winter continues. February has been similar to January – not nearly as cold as December but still below average – the anomaly probably being about -1 or -2C.

Stephen Brown
February 19, 2011 2:48 pm

I voted last week.
I found confirmation mails in two separate in-boxes.
It was the polite thing to do to reply to both.
Both thanked me for my response and informed me that my vote had been counted.
How nice of them.

Robb876
February 19, 2011 4:22 pm

You hang out with scientists??
J/k..

Martin H
February 19, 2011 4:24 pm

Anthony,
First I should say that, as a European Luke-warmer, I appreciate your openness and your even-handed approach. Please don’t worry about a couple of slow days.
But… I’m disturbed, shaken and upset by a couple of replies here.
“You do God’s work”? How did god ever become part of the agenda? Please PLEASE don’t let this become a theme.
and:
“Romm complaining about WUWT being number 1 is like liberal radio complaining about Rush being number 1”
Aargh! Please don’t let WUWT become a politically charged blog. This site records the FACTS, without fear or favour. Sometimes it’s good news, sometimes it’s bad. There must be NO suggestion that you’re politically motivated – please discourage all such taint.

Mike Hebb
February 19, 2011 4:35 pm

Jeez! I’m ready to give Anthony the $20.11 just for the fun I’ve had reading this series.

BFL
February 19, 2011 4:36 pm

Happy to vote for the best (WUWT of course)!
BTW is there any consideration for your take on the Rain Band Shift article in Scientific American?

Caleb
February 19, 2011 4:53 pm

I posted this on Joe Romm’s site:
“I was attracted to meteorology because clouds are so beautiful, as are swirling snowflakes, jagged lightning, rainbows and so on and so forth. I am not at all attracted by humanity’s ability to take something lovely, like the weather, and make an ugly war out of it.
Therefore on certain days, when I’m grouchy and fed up with my fellow man, I skip the articles on WUWT, and especially the comments, (which on other days make me laugh, and even think humanity might not be all that bad.) However even on those grouchy days I still visit WUWT, because the sidebars are so full of factual information, which allow me to do what I like, which is to be filled with wonder about the marvels meteorology involves.
I was not going to vote for “The Best Science Blog,” because popularity contests don’t much interest me. (I’ve been a loner and know the sting of being unpopular.)
However when I read the vitriol towards WUWT on Climate Progress, I recalled the sting of holding an unpopular, socially-incorrect view, and realized WUWT was receiving the same. And for what? Sidebars loaded with facts, and opinions which, to you at least, are politically-incorrect. Climate Progress was not attempting to have any sort of dialog, but rather was attempting to crush.
Therefore I just had to vote for WUWT.
So you see, Joe Romm, the law of unintended consequences strikes again. You gained your nemesis a vote, by being so vitriolic.

el gordo
February 19, 2011 6:44 pm

You have my vote, undoubtedly deserved.

paulc
February 19, 2011 6:46 pm

When I attended high school and university, engineers and physical science students were taught that objectivity is vital in those disciplines.
The current climate fiasco indicates to me that we have lost our objectivity, not to mention our honesty.

John F. Hultquist
February 19, 2011 11:39 pm

Who’s Joe Romm?

lapogus
February 20, 2011 1:35 am

@ Martin H:
Martin, I tend to agree with you, the occasional right-wing and religious comment here grates with me too. The science has become politicised – which I blame on the predominently leftie scientists who started it – but when sceptics appear more motivated/influenced by political or religious beliefs then I think it tends to weaken the scientific integrity of the sceptic position. It’s one of the reasons I now spend more time over at Bishop Hill. Not that they are many lefties over at the Bish’s diocese, and there must be a few non-secularists. But the whole political spectrum is pushed to the right in the US; I think the Democrats would be on the right wing in most European countries.
(I digress but that’s what I don’t get about American politics – your two main parties are very much the same in terms of economic and foreign policies – both have turned a blind eye to the astronomical national debt, both appear to have irrational paranoia about Russia, and both can’t see any fault with the way the Israelies treat the Palestinians. The GOP/Dem badges and Presidential campaigns are just a distraction, it is the neocons and crazies in the Pentagon who are quietly driving policy and running the show (although they were more overt about it under the Bush2 administration).
But I don’t want to detract from what Anthony has achieved here though, which is amazing, he (with help from the mods) has created a fantastic forum for interchange of ideas and data.

Hilary Ostrov (aka hro001)
February 20, 2011 2:42 am

John F. Hultquist says:
February 19, 2011 at 11:39 pm
Who’s Joe Romm?
Sorry, but the correct formulatation of the question is “Joe Who?” Nah … on second thoughts, forget I mentioned it. Joe Clark was a shortlived Prime Minister of Canada (much to the surprise of media pundits when he won the now superceded Conservative party leadership race). When he won the nomination, the MSM rewarded him with the designation of “Joe who?”
In light of the above, when my brain kicked in, I realized that posing the question “Joe who” vis a vis Romm was to accord him far more credibilty than could ever be warranted.
Ergo, My apologies for this comment 😉

Patrick Davis
February 20, 2011 3:20 am

There is no need to Anthony, and we bloggies here understand. This site is truely stunning I am glad I tripped over it, you, the mods and the community here.
While I still live in a “free” Australia, and glad to follow the site and the articles, sadly however, I am not sure how long that will last as S. Conroy wants to control the interweb.

kim
February 20, 2011 4:13 am

Imagine dwelling in Joe’s world. He needs our sympathy.
==================

Jack Greer
February 20, 2011 9:58 am

kim said February 20, 2011 at 4:13 am:
“Imagine dwelling in Joe’s world. He needs our sympathy.”
No need to feel sympathy – I’m sure he’s not looking for any. Romm documents and supports his points extremely well. His criticisms are quite accurate.

TimM
February 20, 2011 5:52 pm

TEASE 🙁

%d bloggers like this: