Apparently, the science was too popular, so what do these fools do? Alienate their readers of course:
Starting today, PopularScience.com will no longer accept comments on new articles. Here’s why.
Comments can be bad for science. That’s why, here at PopularScience.com, we’re shutting them off.
The stupid, it burns like a magnesium flare.
The go on to quote some study as the reason, and blame climate change discussions:
A politically motivated, decades-long war on expertise has eroded the popular consensus on a wide variety of scientifically validated topics. Everything, from evolution to the origins of climate change, is mistakenly up for grabs again. Scientific certainty is just another thing for two people to “debate” on television. And because comments sections tend to be a grotesque reflection of the media culture surrounding them, the cynical work of undermining bedrock scientific doctrine is now being done beneath our own stories, within a website devoted to championing science.
Read it all here: http://www.popsci.com/science/article/2013-09/why-were-shutting-our-comments
Popular Science…gone the way of Scientific American and National Geographic…some moron journalist ‘activist’ types are destroying these once fine publications
rogerknights, yes, I gave that magazine up long ago, even before SciAm. in the 90’s.
It is the equivalent of going back to only publishing The Bible and other important works in Latin so that the plebs only get the Received Wisdom from trustworthy sources, and will be about as effective.
Do they imagine that it is going to boost their readership figures? I would have thought that they will only decline as a consequence.
So you see Galileo Galilei that is why we are called Pope Science.
Good grief, if people think for themselves and form their own opinions, it will upset the scientific process?! What century do these d*ckheads think they’re living in?
Blog god Instapundit recently added comments, and today also covered this story:
http://pjmedia.com/instapundit/176556/#respond
Glenn Reynolds was instrumental in the last few years in getting the skeptical message out there in competent fashion. His site has a donation button.
“Pope Science” (Tom O. Mason) — LOL
Here’s Anthony’s rebuttal 10 months ago to Pop. Sci’s. pontificating:
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2012/11/03/why-i-no-longer-subscribe-to-popular-science/
PopSci: “A politically motivated, decades-long war on expertise has eroded the popular consensus on a wide variety of scientifically validated topics.”
–
Mr. Skeptic: “PopSci has decided that science funded by politicians by definition cannot be political (/sarc). However, any legitimate disagreements about politically funded science must of course be partisan attacks — usually inflicted by Mongolian hordes of paid trolls, the likes of which should not be suffered by us more trusting, consensus embracing, gentile citizens.”
–
PopSci: “If you carry out those results to their logical end–commenters shape public opinion; public opinion shapes public policy; public policy shapes how and whether and what research gets funded–you start to see why we feel compelled to hit the “off” switch.”
–
Mr Skeptic: “Translation: Of course we don’t support certain political and funding goals! It’s just that you unwashed masses and your comments might shape ‘ how and whether and what research gets funded’ — and we can’t have you partisan, paid troll fools affecting that!”
For my great amusement, when some of the shorter CAGW scare articles at Popular Science used the term “climate change” without even once explicitly specifying “global warming” or even warming (since a falsifiable hypothesis would be closer to real science and thus anathema), I sometimes noted and linked to the recent predictions of Dr. Abdussamatov (in charge of Russian solar observations on the International Space Station) for the 19th Little Ice Age in the past 7500 years developing by the middle of this century. (Such isn’t proven going to happen, but it as “climate change” compares favorably to CAGW in likelihood and honesty of research efforts behind it).
Anyway, having been one of the several most inconvenient commentators on some of their CAGW articles … I’m flattered. They know what their article writers can deliver can’t stand up to some of us.
I didn’t have http://img176.imagevenue.com/img.php?image=81829_expanded_overview_122_424lo.jpg originally, but even the utter mismatch of CO2 vs temperature in http://wattsupwiththat.files.wordpress.com/2013/02/gisp220temperaturesince1070020bp20with20co220from20epica20domec1.gif?w=578&h=396 was fun to highlight (when inconveniently zooming in on the centuries rather than the standard misleading trick of keeping zoomed out beyond ocean lag scales).
I used to buy Popular Science and National Geographic as great airplane flight reads with regularity. Ever since they’ve become propaganda rags for the new climate religion I’ve not been able to bring myself to buy them anymore.
I love the study… “hey when people debate and are giving more facts this leaders many to changing their minds out the propaganda line in the story”.
Really? Took you a study to figure that one out huh? Bet that study was tax payer funded as well.
OK, I went to the website….
ELSEWHERE ON POPSCI.COM
===========
This rag has never been the same since Smokey left. I wonder if they still have ads for X-Ray glasses that allow you to see through dresses?
John Mason says:
September 24, 2013 at 10:00 pm
_____________
Agreed.
I read the pages off Popular Science, when I was a boy, but haven’t bothered to thumb through a copy at my favorite news stand, for years. They didn’t just run off the road last week, they’ve been in the ditch with their headlights broken for quite some time.
“… having been one of the several most inconvenient commentators… ” (Henry Clark 9:46pm)
Good job, Mr. Clark! You shut ’em down.
@ur momisugly Alan Robinson re: “in the ditch with their headlights broken for quite some time.”
LOL — But, still layin’ on the horn. Heh.
Whenever i read a statement like the one Popular Science just made, I’m never quite sure if they’re just not smart enough to realize the implications of what they are saying, or if they think we aren’t?
At this very moment, a real life hero is still standing on the Senate floor where he has been talking since 2:41pm this afternoon, EST (trying to prevent vote scheduled for 1 hour after Senate convenes Wed. morning). Ted Cruz, one man standing for freedom from Government Medicine. Go, Ted!
(I think this will link to live CSPAN2 coverage of U. S. Senate Floor)
http://www.ijreview.com/2013/09/81513-breaking-sen-ted-cruz-vows-talk-longer-able-stand-anymore/
Janice Moore says:
September 24, 2013 at 10:26 pm
_______________________
One of my Senators, Tom Coburn, just gave the biggest weasel statement I’ve ever heard today concerning this fight. Can’t wait to light up the Senate switchboard, tomorrow morning…
Dear Alan Robertson,
Thank you, so much, for not misspelling my name after my tired brain messed yours so badly. Sorry about that.
Good for you to get on the phone. I hope Senators Mitch McConnell (sp?) (KY) and ? Cornyn (TX)’s constituents given them an earful (and the boot!), too. Judas skunks!
Glad to know my posting re: hero Ted Cruz (et. al.) met with someone’s approval. Thanks for the effective thumbs up.
Janice Moore says:
September 24, 2013 at 10:38 pm
Dear Alan Robertson,
______________
You’ve known me for quite some time by my former nom de plume, now abandoned.
If Willis can post au natural, then so can I.
Ps I’m in OKC.
@ur momisugly Alan Robertson, a.k.a.,……….. ??? EW3? No, I think that was Allan. Hm. Who have I not seen around lately…. waaaa! I can’t remember ANYTHING at this hour. Well, nice to see you again, Mr. Mysterious Greatheart.
(uh… sorry, but,… “OKC”? Oklahoma City? The only name I know coming out of there is Luther Wu and I was sure that was his real name….)
This is the most apt response I can think of.
Yes, it is true that opening a comments section and not expecting a horde of angry chimpanzees to charge in and begin flinging crap everywhere is a bit much to ask most of the time… but closing one with the excuse that it is hurting science?
What science does PS do, exactly?
How do you hurt a process?
Looking at the content of the current PS, I can only conclude that it has joined the likes of New Scientist and Scientific American that I consigned to the trash-can years back.
On a wider point, it seems to me that these types of publications now employ journalists rather than scientists for whom a story is not a story without a catchy headline – preferably doom ridden! Who cares about the content?
This is also true of other media, for example broadcasters such as the good ole BBC where the presenters are so lacking in basic science, business and mathematical knowledge that they let interviewees get away with the most stupid tosh.
Here is a comment from the Science Recorder…
ReduceGHGs replied to you
“””Just for fun I looked up WUWT and learned a bit about it. You’re being played. Here are some of the details.
“W A W (A W) is a blogger, weathercaster and non-scientist, paid AGW denier who runs the website wattsupwiththat.com. He does not have a university qualification and has no climate credentials other than being a radio weather announcer. His website is parodied and debunked at the website wottsupwiththat.com Watts is on the payroll of the Heartland Institute, which itself is funded by polluting industries”
What a sucker! Don’t you know how to do a source credibility review BEFORE consuming propaganda? Apparently not. Good grief.
4 hours ago
Apparent recovery of Arctic sea ice this year is illusory, say experts”””
———————————————————————————————-
Lots of conversations going on this week. This one has been a peach.
[It is difficult to know whether or not this is an effort to introduce ad homs against our host, however I would point out that AW clearly lays out what he is at the head of the site. He is not on the payroll of Heartland but was once considered and partly funded for a project to make the NOAA data more user friendly. It does represent the desperation of the warmists though as they find the honest, open and welcoming environment here at WUWT to be kryptonite for their childish attempts to scare the world . . mod]