My inbox has been full of this issue this week, and I see it mostly as a tempest in a teapot. But since there is an interest, I’m putting this up for discussion. I can understand the situation, running the most viewed climate related blog, where I’ve noted that a small minority of people can cause a lot of trouble and waste a lot of time. Those people often go astray of the site policy for WUWT, and sometimes find themselves banned for repeated bad behavior. Those that might have contentious views but aren’t intractable zealots learn to work within policy and stick around, and contribute to debate here. That said, a “blanket ban” just wouldn’t work nor would it be sensible. Imagine if a single WUWT moderator decided to make a blanket policy change here. -Anthony
From Fox News:
Critics are slamming Reddit over a single moderator’s decision to ban climate-change skeptics from contributing to its science forum, attacking the move as “political censorship.”
In an op-ed titled “Reddit’s science forum banned climate deniers. Why don’t all newspapers do the same?” Nathan Allen — who described himself a Ph.D. chemist for a major chemical company and a moderator on Reddit’s “/r/science” forum — explained his decision to wipe comments from some users he dismissed as “problematic.”
“These people were true believers, blind to the fact that their arguments were hopelessly flawed, the result of cherry-picked data and conspiratorial thinking,” Allen said in his article, which is posted on Grist.org. “They had no idea that the smart-sounding talking points from their preferred climate blog were, even to a casual climate science observer, plainly wrong.”
Allen went on to attack climate-change skeptics further, saying that evidence to support their position “simply does not exist” and that such people are “enamored by the emotionally charged and rhetoric-based arguments of pundits on talk radio and Fox News.”
‘[Climate skeptics are] enamored by the emotionally charged … arguments of pundits on talk radio and Fox News.’
– Reddit moderator Nathan Allen
Finally, Allen called for other news outlets to follow his example, asking “if a half-dozen volunteers can keep a page with more than 4 million users from being a microphone for the antiscientific, is it too much to ask for newspapers to police their own editorial pages as proficiently?”
The move has drawn accusations of hypocrisy, as Reddit claims to be a haven for free speech and debate. The site describes itself as a place “friendly to thought, relationships, arguments, and to those that wish to challenge those genres.”
Brendan O’Neill, in a blog post for the UK Daily Telegraph, said Reddit has “ripped its own reputation to shreds,” and described the move as “political censorship, designed to silence the expression of dissent about climate-change alarmism on one of the Internet’s most popular user-generated forums.”
James Delingpole, columnist, climate skeptic and author of “The Little Green Book Of Eco Fascism,” was even louder in his criticism.
“The greenies — and their many useful idiots in the liberal media — are terrified of open debate on climate-change because the real world evidence long ago parted company with their scientifically threadbare theory,” Delingpole told FoxNews.com, arguing that Allen’s tactic is part of a “classic liberal defense mechanism: If the facts don’t support you, then close down the argument.”
Victoria Taylor, Reddit’s director of communications, told FoxNews.com that while it was Allen’s prerogative to ban climate-change skeptics from “/r/science,” his statements “do not reflect the views of Reddit as a whole, or other science or climate-oriented subreddits.”
More here:
http://www.foxnews.com/science/2013/12/19/critics-blast-reddit-over-climate-change-skeptic-ban/
h/t to WUWT reader “Pete”.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Quoted from above:
Finally, Allen called for other news outlets to follow his example, asking “if a half-dozen volunteers can keep a page with more than 4 million users from being a microphone for the antiscientific, is it too much to ask for newspapers to police their own editorial pages as proficiently?”
——————————
This is a very misleading claim. In the original write-up Allen starts out with the claim that Reddit has over 4 million users but uses the caveat “of which the science forum is a small part” (I’m paraphrasing him but it’s at the start of his article).
I would hazard a guess that the science forum has a half-dozen volunteers and is a very small part of Reddit of which climate science is an even smaller part – certainly nowhere near 4 million users.
I find it disturbing that the warmists think that we don’t have evidence to support our position. It is the warmists that are hypothesising that natural climate patterns are not as it seems. It is they who are the deniers and should be required to provide the evidence which unfortunately for them does not exist. Climate models, and hypotheses based on them is not evidence neither is fabricated consensus. The reactions of warmists to refuse to debate issues is the clearest evidence of their lack of evidence
We have already been discussing this at Jo Nova ….
http://joannenova.com.au/2013/12/reddit-gives-up-on-debate-bans-deniers-and-repositions-as-low-traffic-propaganda-unit/
arstechnica.com has been marking skeptic posts in climate change articles as spam for a few months now and gave pretty much the same reasons as reddit. not all get marked that way but many that dont toe the AGW line do. this of course, has led to less critical posts in the articles because people are self-censoring
I take the Reddit ban seriously – this is the new left strategy – shut down any dissent when it does not support their arguments. The LA Times did the same, and other major networks are extremely reluctant even acknowledging there are facts that challenge the global warming religion.
@Rabbit – in r/science, you could post a link to a peer-reviewed paper with a lower ECS estimate, but it would likely be buried (by downvotes) and one (or several) of a regular crew of alarmist commenters would mock, disparage, and simplistically contradict, depending on how you have contextualized the research. But as it would never rise in the posts list (which are sorted based on time, but mostly votes) there would be very little discussion. In some ways, it’s the same as the “bury brigades” that were partially responsible for Digg’s loss of prestige. But it is also the echo-chamber effect of the reddit “hivemind”.
The problem is not so much one of a formal banning policy, as continual social censorship, and an ongoing campaign (both organized and disorganized) to attack and misrepresent the skeptical perspective on IPCC climate science/politics, while pumping the CAGW message. Despite the general irrelevance of much of reddit, this demographic (young, culturally influential) is a prime target for the alarmist PR machine.
One of the most frequent climate-related posters/commenters is user ‘pnewell’… he even has a special icon next to his name in r/science, ostensibly legitimizing his credentials as a high-profile member of that “subreddit”, and a scientific authority, of sorts. He is also the user who posted Nathan Allen’s article across reddit (perhaps not unusual, as he often posts 40+ links per day.) It turns out this is Philip Newell, a “communications associate” at Climate Nexus, a “strategic communications” NGO funded by Rockefeller Philanthropy Advisors.
One of their stated goals is to attempt to connect extreme weather events with AGW. Look at this page, and explore the rest of their site:
————
http://climatenexus.org/whatwedo/our-work/
Idea
Superstorm Sandy approached the mid-Atlantic on Oct 26, 2012. Polling indicates that making connections to extreme weather helps people to understand the significance of climate change and its associated impacts. In line with this research, Climate Nexus identified the storm as a potential messaging focus.
Action
Climate Nexus distributed background information on the hurricane and its relationship to climate change to hundreds of environmental reporters, editorial writers, op-ed page editors and meteorologists. During the storm and its aftermath, we put journalists in contact with our expert partners Dr. Kerry Emanuel, Dr. Kevin Trenberth, Dr. Michael Oppenheimer, Dr. J. Marshall Shepherd, Dr. Anthony Lesierowitz, Dr. Jenifer Francis and Dr. Jeff Masters. Our efforts helped secured dozens of interviews for these experts on the storm and climate change, which generated hundreds of stories in the mainstream media.
From the background information we developed messaging guidelines, which we presented at a Climate Access briefing with over 100 participants. The guidelines were also shared with select congressional staff as well as with the green community. Representative Ed Markey used it to prepare for his appearance on Hardball, and Media Matters’ booking staff used it to prepare other guests appearing on cable news. Environmental organizations found it helpful in preparing their own talking points, media materials and blog posts.
Finally, Climate Nexus implemented the messages directly in content distributed via our own social media networks.
———–
[youtube=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q3iAqxNpQ-A&w=480&h=360]
I stand corrected. The reddit /r/science forum does have 4 million users. Please disregard my earlier post. Must work on my reading comprehension.
‘Victoria Taylor…told FoxNews.com that…Allen’s…statements “do not reflect the views of Reddit as a whole…”‘
Yet Reddit goes along with it anyway? Taylor needs a reality check.
On topic. Another web-site denying deniers.
http://www.credomobilize.com/efforts/tell-newspapers-don-t-publish-climate-change-denial-conspiracy-theories/petitions/new
Delingpole told FoxNews.com, arguing that Allen’s tactic is part of a “classic liberal defense mechanism: If the facts don’t support you, then close down the argument.”
That is a bullseye. Few here deny changing climate in any event. We merely argue with the proposed causal variables for that change and faulty predictions of past, present and future climate and expectations of same. Better not to emulate A&E ala Duck Dynasty
Here is an extract from an article by Nathan Allen, in “Grist” in which he explains, or defends his action.
My question is :-
What is the size of the group the ” 97% of climate scientists” belong to?
Quote
The end result was a disservice to science and to rational exploration, not to mention the scholarly audience we are proud to have cultivated. When 97 percent of climate scientists agree that man is changing the climate, we would hope the comments would at least acknowledge if not reflect such widespread consensus. Since that was not the case, we needed more than just an ad hoc approach to correct the situation.
Unquote
The Grist article is worth reading, I like the head-in-the-sand picture at the top, it exemplifies Grist’s moderate and civilised approach to scientific discussion.
Jeff in Calgary says:
FYI, Reddit is very popular with 20-30 year old crowd.
Jeff,
There is a sad truth related to this. Our youngest generation has been completely brainwashed by design on this topic. My 2nd grade grand daughters science book(not just teacher….book) had a chapter on humans negative impact on our planet. It stated damages from global warming and the changing climate from carbon dioxide coming from power plants and cars.
The junior high science teachers in this district are friends(I’m the chess coach at that school and 3 others). We used to have discussions about this years ago when they wanted my opinion(as a meteorologist). I found out then they were teaching the opposite of my view, pushing the alarmism. Now they will NEVER bring the subject up though I enjoy talking with them every Wednesday about science.
At one of our local universities(University of Southern Indiana), few years back 5 science professors(none in a field related to this) combined to write a response to an article I wrote and was printed in our paper. They did their best to trash me without providing 1 iota of evidence that I was wrong……………….so our schools of higher education are completing the junk science brainwash that starts in 2nd grade.
Once you get your college diploma, if you’ve taken an environmental science or related class, you are also indoctrinated into the global warming/climate change religion.
The first generation to go completely thru the school sponsored brainwash programming from start to finish is now in that 20-30 year old age bracket.
Their brains are incapable of seeing the truth. They process information based on what was taught to them and stored in their brains as knowledge/fact/truth during the 15 years they spent in school.
It would be like somebody stating the sun revolves around the earth to them. From an observer on the surface of earth that knows nothing about this relationship, that might make sense. Once we are taught the earth revolved around the sun and store that knowledge in our brain, we process all new information related to that in a different way……….and can understand much more and build upon that huge assumption that we were taught…….which just reinforces the original fact.
When our young people learn that CO2 is pollution and is causing global warming and climate change, it gets stored as knowledge in their brains. Then, its a piece of cake to build on that foundation. What supports what they now think they know…………reinforces it. What contradicts it……………gets rejected.
Us that never had the brainwash can’t understand why the brainwashed can’t see what looks obvious…………….because our brains are capable of seeing things that their brains reject.
To them, our position really appears as akin to stating the sun revolves around the earth!
Calling sceptics “true believers” is such a hoot. True unbelievers perhaps… but then that would show AGW to be a religion and “Global Warming” tax to be their jihad…
@Steve – r/science has 4m user accounts subscribed. But many of those are dormant and/or multiple accounts. As a default subreddit new users are automatically subscribed.
‘Victoria Taylor, Reddit’s director of communications, told FoxNews.com that while it was Allen’s prerogative to ban climate-change skeptics from “/r/science,” his statements “do not reflect the views of Reddit as a whole, or other science or climate-oriented subreddits.”’
That must be Victoria’s Secret.
Many technical and scientific skeptics, in particular, are reticent in pointing out the obvious political synergy of academia, media and government interests. It boarders on idiocy at times.
It’s sad I admit but the political I.D. of any advocacy science that is so testimonial in nature should include political disclosures. It’s remarkable ineptitude over generations now that so many comfortable academics and critics of AGW duck the topic. Skeptics were routinely purged by politically motivated activist leadership (leftists) for decades in many science associations. The “consensus” itself would be fully exposed as like minded in world views (statist) but skeptics live with a civility and customs of another time. That’s how they got pushed out at the academic and peer review level in the first place. The vindictive political undercurrent of AGW is often minimized for the sake of spaghetti charts and pointless chivalry to a fundamentally dishonest science proposition; “it’s about science”, which of course is nonsense. There was the natural weight of numbers you would expect in any “Green” science field and the usual temperament of activists driving the monopoly but there is also the reality of tortured skeptics who often share similar politics with AGW advocates and their weak rebuttal to the actual AGW undercurrent themes. The elephant is the room of raw hate politics is beneath many skeptics mentioning. While I fault the core of the AGW activists I also fault the weak minded skeptical community for their mushy indifference to the core politics driving alarmists to success.
Peer review all but implies the consensus cartel to the tool making the call at Reddit. People go quietly on academic, government and media totalitarianism and these are the results. It will be somewhat contained by the image concerns going into next years elections but will intensify in 2015. America is a hair from Banana Republic status.
A couple of weeks ago Reddit (or the science subforum) cut a deal with the Nature, the journal.
http://www.reddit.com/r/science/comments/1s6410/subreddit_announcement_nature_partnership_with/
It would not shock me if it turned out Nature editors said something like “yes will participate a bit in the threads, but no way if you allow those pesky denialists”.
Just speculation.
btw Reddit has a subforum http://www.reddit.com/r/climateskeptics/ which I guess you could call the skeptics ghetto/designated free speech area. It has 5000 subscribers, including myself.
MikeB says:
December 20, 2013 at 1:00 pm
For those of you use Reddit (I’ve never head of it) I recommend you do just as Steve Mosher suggests; submit just pro-warming arguments which become more and more ridiculous until even the dumbest of the true believers begin to ask questions. I know that Americans do not understand satire, but as Jonathan Swift demonstrated, this can prove to be a very powerful tactic.
############
yup.
(Comment was caught in the spam filter (please delete orginal, admin) so I’ll remove the link and repost my reply to Rabbit, who asked where the line is drawn and whether he could post on climate sensitivity in r/science.)
@Rabbit – in r/science, you could post a link to a peer-reviewed paper with a lower ECS estimate, but it would likely be buried (by downvotes) and one (or several) of a regular crew of alarmist commenters would mock, disparage, and simplistically contradict, depending on how you have contextualized the research. But as it would never rise in the posts list (which are sorted based on time, but mostly votes) there would be very little discussion. In some ways, it’s the same as the “bury brigades” that were partially responsible for Digg’s loss of prestige. But it is also the echo-chamber effect of the reddit “hivemind”.
The problem is not so much one of a formal banning policy, as continual social censorship, and an ongoing campaign (both organized and disorganized) to attack and misrepresent the skeptical perspective on IPCC climate science/politics, while pumping the CAGW message. Despite the general irrelevance of much of reddit, this demographic (young, culturally influential) is a prime target for the alarmist PR machine.
One of the most frequent climate-related posters/commenters is user ‘pnewell’… he even has a special icon next to his name in r/science, ostensibly legitimizing his credentials as a high-profile member of that “subreddit”, and a scientific authority, of sorts. He is also the user who posted Nathan Allen’s article across reddit (perhaps not unusual, as he often posts 40+ links per day.) It turns out this is Philip Newell, a “communications associate” at Climate Nexus, a “strategic communications” NGO funded by Rockefeller Philanthropy Advisors.
One of their stated goals is to attempt to connect extreme weather events with AGW. Look at this page, and explore the rest of their site. (Search “Climate Nexus what we do”)
————
Idea
Superstorm Sandy approached the mid-Atlantic on Oct 26, 2012. Polling indicates that making connections to extreme weather helps people to understand the significance of climate change and its associated impacts. In line with this research, Climate Nexus identified the storm as a potential messaging focus.
Action
Climate Nexus distributed background information on the hurricane and its relationship to climate change to hundreds of environmental reporters, editorial writers, op-ed page editors and meteorologists. During the storm and its aftermath, we put journalists in contact with our expert partners Dr. Kerry Emanuel, Dr. Kevin Trenberth, Dr. Michael Oppenheimer, Dr. J. Marshall Shepherd, Dr. Anthony Lesierowitz, Dr. Jenifer Francis and Dr. Jeff Masters. Our efforts helped secured dozens of interviews for these experts on the storm and climate change, which generated hundreds of stories in the mainstream media.
From the background information we developed messaging guidelines, which we presented at a Climate Access briefing with over 100 participants. The guidelines were also shared with select congressional staff as well as with the green community. Representative Ed Markey used it to prepare for his appearance on Hardball, and Media Matters’ booking staff used it to prepare other guests appearing on cable news. Environmental organizations found it helpful in preparing their own talking points, media materials and blog posts.
Finally, Climate Nexus implemented the messages directly in content distributed via our own social media networks.
—–
Janice Moore 11:57am 20 December
‘why does he call “fire” “foy-yuh”?’
OT I know – apologies – but she did ask!
Thanks for the great clip. His mangled nasal tone (reminiscent of Croydon and similar places immediately south or west of London) is universally recognised in Britain as the sound of Aspergic techies & petty officialdom. There was another splendid sit-com example (more nasal, less mangled, MUCH more self-important) – Gordon Brittas (manager of a city-run leisure centre in “The Brittas Empire”).
M Simon says:
December 20, 2013 at 11:34 am
What is Reddit?
I think it’s the noise made by a frog.
Allen is engaging in censorship of opinion, pure and simple. If the following comment isn’t psychological projection, then nothing is:
“These people were true believers, blind to the fact that their arguments were hopelessly flawed, the result of cherry-picked data and conspiratorial thinking,” Allen said…
Censor Allen is describing himself exactly, isn’t he?
TobiasN, I suggest that you spend your time on productive blogs. Tell Reddit to go pound sand. They are just corralling you into a like-minded group of head nodders, where you can do no damage to their completely falsified climate alarmist beliefs. Really, you are not accomplishing anything there, it is a complete waste of your time. Tell them you’re leaving, and why: censorship of opposing beliefs is antiethical to Western thought and culture. Allen is acting like a North Korean dictator.
If a conjecture such as catastrophic AGW, or any scientific hypothesis cannot be defended except by censoring different points of view, then it is bankrupt. The cAGW conjecture has been destroyed, as the real world is making clear to everyone.
The basic claim of the climate alarmist crowd has always been that a rise in “carbon” will cause runaway global warming and climate catastrophe. <—That is their conjecture in a nutshell. Everything else is just anti-science nonsense and verbal tap-dancing.
As we can all see, CO2 has been steadily rising… but global temperatures have been flat to declining. There is no way around this: the CO2=cAGW conjecture has been completely debunked by Planet Earth. Mr Allen is just being a pipsqueak censor. Don’t give his site any oxygen by clicking on it. The real world has decisively proven that he is wrong. Censorship is the only tactic he has left.
What’s a Reddit?
Do they also ban peer-reviewed scientific papers that do not agree with their pet theory? Perhaps the offending moderator can oversee the book burning with a prayer – or perform a sacrifice to Gaia – to sanctify the event. Just like Duck Dynasty, when you mess with people’s religious beliefs, they do crazy things. Censorship is the only way this debate can possibly be won by their side …. and they know it.