Essan-tastic!

[parmenides3]

While trawling through various climate-related blogs, I was stopped in my tracks by a reference to one of our regulars, Essan (Andy Mayhew), who is also a forum manager on UKww.

It appears on the website of Steve McIntyre, http://climateaudit.org under an entry for October 5th.

McIntyre is one of the co-authors of an important paper (in 2003) drawing attention to problems with the famous 'hockey stick' graph of Mann, Bradley and Hughes, which featured heavily in the IPCC Third Annual Report, and has since become a kind of 'icon' for people wishing to draw attention to the possibility of a 'dire' future. There are lots of discussion on various threads about this graph, and recent attention increased again, especially in the USA, when two separate committees, a scientific one and a congressional one, both studied the validity of the graph. All this action was brought about, to a large degree, by McIntyre & McKittrick's work. (Both committees, by the way, accepted that the graph was, broadly, okay).

UKww (actually, Essan) recently started up a new thread on the Holocene Climate Optimum, which was restricted deliberately to posts giving references to scientific papers on this subject. Yours truly, of course, threw in a penny's worth or two. This thread is specifically referred to on McIntyre's blog. Looking further, I find that he has been a 'fan' of the site for at least a year, probably longer.

Two reasons, then, for mentioning this; firstly, a big hats-off to Andy, for influencing the high-rollers in the Climate science community and, secondly, a point to make about our own Forum and our posts; it is fair to assume that some of the people whose work we write about (especially in theory discussions about the climate, I suppose) actually read what we say. Therefore, when we give an opinion, we should be very careful a] not to offend the authors, who are, after all, doing their jobs and probably know more than we do about the subject, and b] not to print anything ptentially libellous - both individuals, and the forum, could get into a lot of trouble if somebody got upset and decided to take action about it.

Back to the smiley face, let's hear it for Essan! Good man; keep it up!

:)P

[Essan]

Thks P3

And a good point there about watching what you write - you never know who may be reading your posts. Not just climate scientists and the like, but I'm sure a few senior meteorlogists at the Met Office and BBC, for example, have a look in from time to time. As do some journalists/newspaper columnists

[snowsure]

Thks P3

And a good point there about watching what you write - you never know who may be reading your posts. Not just climate scientists and the like, but I'm sure a few senior meteorlogists at the Met Office and BBC, for example, have a look in from time to time. As do some journalists/newspaper columnists

I hope that they (scientists/meteorologists not jounalists) exercise their right to comment - rather than just sue - and bring another type of learned opinion to some of the debates on here.

Failing that, it is possible that worthwhile debate has been halted by such dire warnings.

Well done ( or well done )

[parmenides3]

I hope that they (scientists/meteorologists not jounalists) exercise their right to comment - rather than just sue - and bring another type of learned opinion to some of the debates on here.

Failing that, it is possible that worthwhile debate has been halted by such dire warnings.

Well done ( or well done )

Why would this warning stop worthwhile debate? The point is that sometimes, in the heat of the moment. people post incredibly rude ad homs about some of the people involved in climate science (for example, calling them liars or frauds). Avoiding this does not stifle debate, it stifles abusive and meretricious posting.

:)P

[Dawlish]

Why would this warning stop worthwhile debate? The point is that sometimes, in the heat of the moment. people post incredibly rude ad homs about some of the people involved in climate science (for example, calling them liars or frauds). Avoiding this does not stifle debate, it stifles abusive and meretricious posting.

:)P

Why on earth would an academic researcher be worried about what uninformed idiots (like, say, me) would say about their research on an obscure weather website that they've probably never even heard of? To me, the idea of suing any of us, bacause we describe someone's published ideas as twaddle, is bonkers. Does anyone really care that much? If we were competitors, in the same field and we were issuing uninformed, libellous comments, OK, but on a UK weather forum?? If the comments were that bad, I would imagine they'd be sanctioned anyway. If I'd published something that sparked debate, on a weather site, I think I'd be flattered rather than litigious. Honestly; I view it as a nanny state suggestion. Another dire warning of what might happen if we step outside of conformity and try something risky in our lives. I'll take my chances and back myself not to be so stupid.

I went to Bicton House Arboretum the other day (great place, recommended if you come to the area) and at the bottom of one particularly steep, grassy, slope (only one - and there are many) there was a little sign and it read; "do not slide down this slope". I know exactly why it was there and it wasn't to deter anyone; it couldn't. It was there to cover the owners if someone was stupid enough to do exactly that.

Paul

Edited October 9, 2006 by Dawlish

[parmenides3]

Why on earth would an academic researcher be worried about what uninformed idiots (like, say, me) would say about their research on an obscure weather website that they've probably never even heard of? To me, the idea of suing any of us, bacause we describe someone's published ideas as twaddle, is bonkers. Does anyone really care that much? If we were competitors, in the same field and we were issuing uninformed, libellous comments, OK, but on a UK weather forum?? If the comments were that bad, I would imagine they'd be sanctioned anyway. If I'd published something that sparked debate, on a weather site, I think I'd be flattered rather than litigious. Honestly; I view it as a nanny state suggestion. Another dire warning of what might happen if we step outside of conformity and try something risky in our lives. I'll take my chances and back myself not to be so stupid.

I went to Bicton House Arboretum the other day (great place, recommended if you come to the area) and at the bottom of one particularly steep, grassy, slope (only one - and there are many) there was a little sign and it read; "do not slide down this slope". I know exactly why it was there and it wasn't to deter anyone; it couldn't. It was there to cover the owners if someone was stupid enough to do exactly that.

Paul

Fair comment; point b] is probably nonsense. I am ill, you know. I'd rather not be thought of in terms of nanny-statism, though, Paul, rather as someone who prefers reasoned discussion to unjustified ad homs.

Nobody's perfect; 'specially me.

:)P

[Dawlish]

Fair comment; point b] is probably nonsense. I am ill, you know. I'd rather not be thought of in terms of nanny-statism, though, Paul, rather as someone who prefers reasoned discussion to unjustified ad homs.

Nobody's perfect; 'specially me.

:)P

Hey! You're not as non-perfect as I am mister, so you can get that out of your head right away! In a perfect race I could finish a distant second to you any day. So there

Paul

Edited October 9, 2006 by Dawlish

[parmenides3]

Hey! You're not as non-perfect as I am mister, so you can get that out of your head right away! In a perfect race I could finish a distant second to you any day. So there

Paul

If only you knew... in my defence, I'll say its amazing what people will put into writing when they have a temp of 102. I wouldn't underestimate 'obscure weather websites', though. Clearly, there are people out there (including the USA) who do read UK-based weather websites. It would be nice of they joined in sometimes, though.

:)P

[Gray-Wolf]

If only you knew... in my defense, I'll say its amazing what people will put into writing when they have a temp of 102. I wouldn't underestimate 'obscure weather websites', though. Clearly, there are people out there (including the USA) who do read UK-based weather websites. It would be nice of they joined in sometimes, though.

P

I remember my first visit here (someone on BBC's board advised us there was a 'better way') and though easy to 'Lurk' it was a very intimidating 'first step' to sign up and join in (though everyone was wonderfully welcoming)So let them Lurk until they realise it's a nice , chummy kinda site!!!

[parmenides3]

I remember my first visit here (someone on BBC's board advised us there was a 'better way') and though easy to 'Lurk' it was a very intimidating 'first step' to sign up and join in (though everyone was wonderfully welcoming)So let them Lurk until they realise it's a nice , chummy kinda site!!!

Strangely enough, I had an email this am from Colorado State about something else, but took the opportunity to suggest exactly this to them. Can't hurt.

:)P