Comments on: Sorry for the loss of service http://climateaudit.org/2007/08/10/sorry-for-the-loss-of-service/ by Steve McIntyre Sun, 19 May 2013 11:52:00 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.com/ By: MarkW http://climateaudit.org/2007/08/10/sorry-for-the-loss-of-service/#comment-98505 Wed, 15 Aug 2007 15:18:32 +0000 http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=1881#comment-98505 #26,

My bad
“For a site that claims to be conservative”

Should read

“For a site that claims to be non-political”

SteveM has stated time and time again that he wants to stay away from politics.

It seems that this is a one sided exclusion.

]]> By: fFreddy http://climateaudit.org/2007/08/10/sorry-for-the-loss-of-service/#comment-98504 Wed, 15 Aug 2007 15:15:14 +0000 http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=1881#comment-98504 Re #26, MarkW

For a site that claims to be conservative,

Really ? Where ?

]]> By: MarkW http://climateaudit.org/2007/08/10/sorry-for-the-loss-of-service/#comment-98503 Wed, 15 Aug 2007 14:07:15 +0000 http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=1881#comment-98503 #2,

For a site that claims to be conservative, why the consistent conservative bashing?
I’m willing to bet that if I were to try and defend the conservatives being bashed, SteveM would delete those posts. (In fact he has done just that in the past.)

]]> By: fFreddy http://climateaudit.org/2007/08/10/sorry-for-the-loss-of-service/#comment-98502 Mon, 13 Aug 2007 13:42:29 +0000 http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=1881#comment-98502 Re #17, John A

CA is moving to a new box this weekend. Twice the memory.

Is that going to be enough for this sort of traffic spike ?

]]> By: Steve LeMaster http://climateaudit.org/2007/08/10/sorry-for-the-loss-of-service/#comment-98501 Sat, 11 Aug 2007 21:45:14 +0000 http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=1881#comment-98501 I am trying to keep up with the latest info in regards to these recent attacks. Seems to be some unconfirmed rumors that sabatoge was at play at surfacestations.org.

Going to wait before I post anything at Global Warming skeptics

]]> By: M. Simon http://climateaudit.org/2007/08/10/sorry-for-the-loss-of-service/#comment-98500 Sat, 11 Aug 2007 19:21:17 +0000 http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=1881#comment-98500 I’m keeping my readers informed of happenings at Power and Control and at The Astute Bloggers

http://www.classicalvalues.com/archives/2007/08/climate_audit_h.html

The above blog got an Instapundit link AND a Fark link.

BTW I WAS jonesing while you were down. I feel lucky to be on the active ‘net.

]]> By: Steve McIntyre http://climateaudit.org/2007/08/10/sorry-for-the-loss-of-service/#comment-98499 Sat, 11 Aug 2007 16:31:01 +0000 http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=1881#comment-98499 If CA seems quiet, it’s because CA is on “partial lockdown” right now. Access is limited to three points because of the volume problems. If you can read this message, you’re on one of those nets. bigcitylib – I guess you and I have the same internet provider.

]]> By: Steve LeMaster http://climateaudit.org/2007/08/10/sorry-for-the-loss-of-service/#comment-98498 Sat, 11 Aug 2007 05:54:37 +0000 http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=1881#comment-98498 I just posted a site announcement on my site. I was already hit once before, it’s not going to happen again.

]]> By: jae http://climateaudit.org/2007/08/10/sorry-for-the-loss-of-service/#comment-98497 Sat, 11 Aug 2007 01:59:08 +0000 http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=1881#comment-98497 19: So? This is modus operandi for many regulatory agencies and NGOs. Too bad there isn’t a blog that audits all the crap from these folks. I’m very worried about my grandchildren.

]]> By: Steve Ciardelli http://climateaudit.org/2007/08/10/sorry-for-the-loss-of-service/#comment-98496 Sat, 11 Aug 2007 00:51:34 +0000 http://www.climateaudit.org/?p=1881#comment-98496 I heard your story on Rush and FOX NEWS. I have some data for you. A few years ago I attended an air quality meeting where the Vermont Agency of Natural resources presents data showing Vermont’s air quality vs other state. i couldn’t believe the data could be accurate or represntative of Vermont air quality.
I followed up and had a meeting with the state people who complied the data and held the meeting. Come to find out, the data came from the only air quality monitoring station in the state at that time. It was located in downtown Burlington next to the exit payboth (20 feet)of a large parking lot. It was adjacent to a 4 lane road with a stop light within 100ft. At this 3 corner intesection there were 2 gas stations. You get the point…. I asked why this location was chosen and if they diid any remote monitoring to validate the reading. i was told they didn’t hve money to do remote monitoring and that funding dependied on finding a problem. I have photos of this statuion which has since been moved. The problem is that for a number of years this represented Vermont air quality. In fact a cancer study using this data insdicated a much higher cancer rate. I got the data and assumptions for the stusy and talked to the person doing it. WOOPS, very defensive. Turns out you would have to be ther 24/7, 300 days a year for 20 years to have the increased rate. Sort of like breathign a the exhaust fumnes directly. I showed the data to the local media who wrote stories, but they chose to ignore my facts. not surprising in a state like Vermont KEEP UP THE GOOD WORK. I still have much of the data and photos
Steve Ciardelli
Burlington, Vt

]]>