Comments on: 2007 Weblog Award Finalists

By: TerryB

TerryB — Thu, 08 Nov 2007 21:59:30 +0000

To all at CA.

10pm UK time and its looking close now – but I think you might just pip it.

I’ve been a non-contributing lurker here for ages now and most who’ve contributed – whatever side they’re on – should be congratulated for having an open, honest exchange of views to the benefit of science.

Not quite the Nobel that Gore-Al (Jor El) got, but still, well deserved.

Lets hope this makes Steve’s excellent work become more prominent and helps bring about more honest and diligent research when undertaking poxy – sorry, proxy – reconstructions with fancy al-gore-rithms. Sorry, couldn’t resist that.

Whatever the final result, well done.

By: PaddikJ

PaddikJ — Mon, 05 Nov 2007 06:52:25 +0000

Been a pretty sporadic lurker lately – plate runneth over – but looks like I stopped by just in time to cast a few votes for CA, which I will do every 24 hours for as long as I can. As of about 10 minutes ago, CA was just a few points out of first place. No matter where CA places once the dust settles, I choose to believe this portends well for skepticism and sanity.

BTW, I agree w/ Buddenbrook, ca: #48: While it was uncommonly civil for Steve to “nominate” RC, their condescending, censoring ways are not science – they’re anti-science.

By: steven mosher

steven mosher — Mon, 05 Nov 2007 03:38:18 +0000

SteveMc. Not sure if you’ve seen the new USHCN methodology. Looks like Some new refrences
to change point analysis. There is a bunch of stuff. I’ll start with this and shut up
if you’ve seen it already

http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/oa/climate/research/ushcn/hcntmptrends.php

By: Steve Moore

Steve Moore — Mon, 05 Nov 2007 01:04:48 +0000

I had never heard of pharynx, or phenacitin, or phlogiston, or whatever the name of that site is. And now that I’ve had the chance to look at it, it’s just as well. Neither the style nor writing appeals to me — someone who doesn’t know the difference between “there” and “their” is someone I tend to avoid.

Bad Astronomy, on the other hand, is a place I’ve been known to visit. There’s a bit of chaff, but some good things can be found.

By: Steve McIntyre

Steve McIntyre — Sun, 04 Nov 2007 22:45:33 +0000

BAck from the week-end. CA doing very well in this poll. We’re within 100 votes of Pharyngula right now for 2nd and within 300 votes of Bad Astronomy who are now in 1st. We’ve done much better than realclimate 2006 (who only got 458 votes in total).

By: brian

brian — Sun, 04 Nov 2007 20:08:41 +0000

fFreddy…oh, okay thanks…but, we were discussing what Pharyngula’s blog was about, I thought? RichinAZ #124 would have to be clipped to…as with a lot of other comments in this thread that talk about Pharyngula. Sorry, but I think that’s an unfair snip, but it’s your blog.

By: fFreddy

fFreddy — Sun, 04 Nov 2007 20:02:30 +0000

The non-Darwinian one …

By: brian

brian — Sun, 04 Nov 2007 19:53:58 +0000

[snip - c-word isnt allowed here even by reference.]

I apologize, but, to be honest, I don’t even know what ‘c’ word I referred to in that comment? Can someone clue me in…I don’t want to use it again if it’s not allowed. Thanks.

By: Larry

Larry — Sun, 04 Nov 2007 19:14:23 +0000

In an odd sort of way, there’s a similarity between genetics and climate in that both have a strong political intersection. In both cases, the politics often drives the science, and the science, in turn, reaps the cash.

By: brian

brian — Sun, 04 Nov 2007 18:32:27 +0000

[snip - c-word isn't allowed here even by reference.]