tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9093436161326155359.post2102458408731653998..comments2024-03-29T09:21:04.576+00:00Comments on Variable Variability: My immature and neurotic fixation on WUWTVictor Venemahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/02842816166712285801noreply@blogger.comBlogger16125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9093436161326155359.post-70457861513531434502014-06-16T15:13:49.038+01:002014-06-16T15:13:49.038+01:00A Sisyphean hell? Mark, you are becoming so old fa...A Sisyphean hell? Mark, you are becoming so old fashioned. That is called a fitness studio nowadays and is something modern people need to thrive. :)<br /><br />Anonymous, I guess one should not have too much ambition to change people's believe on the internet. Especially not the well-known climate change "sceptics". There is no argument that will change their minds. I have some hope for more open minded people, they will probably just read and not sprout their opinion into the world before they understand this issues. They may find the arguments convincing or see the behaviour of the "sceptics" and turn away from them in disgust.<br /><br />I guess the examples in this post show that people need to be open for change and decide themselves to look for the information and weigh the evidence. All I can do is to make sure that the information is there.<br /><br />Changing ones believes is a longer process and people orient themselves to their peers and what they think. At best this blog could help a little with some background information on science. Or in case someone in such a conversation starts to play climateball with one of the standard climate "sceptic" memes provide some information on the climate "debate".<br /><br />Private conversations are the most important thing. <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Qp-nJKBwQR4" rel="nofollow">This video explains how to do that best</a>.Victor Venemahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02842816166712285801noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9093436161326155359.post-77334372695747157262014-06-16T14:58:26.580+01:002014-06-16T14:58:26.580+01:00Dear "-=NikFromNYC=-, Ph.D. in carbon chemist...Dear "-=NikFromNYC=-, Ph.D. in carbon chemistry (Columbia/Harvard)",<br /><br />Congratulations with your PhD, but to be honest that dont impress me much. <br /><br />If you want to write an uncivil comment, please at least include one clear argument. Best refrain for the immature accusations and make a scientific argument. You didn't get your PhD for nothing, I hope.<br /><br />And please, as I have written so many times, refrain from linking to pictures, but refer to a text explaining the figure. How would you respond if someone called carbon chemistry a hoax and showed a figure as proof. :-)<br /><br />If you do not know how where the data comes from, how it was processed, why important processing steps were not taken, it does not contain information, then it is just suggestive. Is that all your ilk can do? <br /><br />In this case it would be especially nice if you would refer to a post below which there is also commentary from both sides, so that someone can explain to the lay reader what it wrong about the figure.<br /><br />Surely with your lovely PhD you should be able to make a scientific publication out of this? Or do you not really believe in this nonsense and are you not willing to waste your life time to produce a manuscript? Is that because you know it would not be a solid manuscript?Victor Venemahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02842816166712285801noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9093436161326155359.post-31736400673330928992014-06-16T02:25:34.492+01:002014-06-16T02:25:34.492+01:00I read an interesting book that made the point tha...I read an interesting book that made the point that arguing beliefs with people doesn't change many minds. A better approach is epistemology: to discuss how they know what they know to help them understand that their approach is not a sound way to get solid information. In my view that is the key point. If you get your information from scientific reports you have a firm basis for your beliefs. If you base what information you accept based on your religious or political beliefs it is hard to come to a reality based opinion. I was always puzzled why if you knew that someone didn't believe in climate change and evolution you could pretty accurately guess their religious and political affiliations. Epistemology finally explained that to to me.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9093436161326155359.post-14045087641517841492014-06-15T03:01:48.351+01:002014-06-15T03:01:48.351+01:00I don't mean to be discouraging...I think what...I don't mean to be discouraging...I think what you do is terrifically valuable.<br /><br />I worry! It seems to me every climate change bloggers is at great risk of wandering to his or her own <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sisyphus" rel="nofollow">Sisyphean hell.</a><br /><br /> Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15427410783634375334noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9093436161326155359.post-53522430835534112052014-06-14T11:35:57.647+01:002014-06-14T11:35:57.647+01:00Mark, I guess it is good when people realise that ...Mark, I guess it is good when people realise that the climate "debate" is a schoolyard fight and has nothing to do with science. Exposing bad behaviour is important to contain it. Like #yesAllMan or previously in Germany #aufschrei, made people aware how common violence (against women) is. <br /><br />Just this week there was another misinformation post on WUWT on homogenization. All my comments were published (after a considerable delay). If not, it would have been my next post; I think that helps getting my comments published. <br /><br />To my surprise even the comment was published where I asked why I was under moderation and asked what people feared. It is somewhat ironic that I am under moderation. I am much more civil than many WUWT groupies. A major theme of WUWT is the quality of station measurements, which is my speciality. Thus might naively expect that WUWT would be interested in talking to me, rather than put me on moderation. Naively, if you think that WUWT is interested in improving understanding rather than in an undercover political fight.<br /><br />Anthony Watts is not just some jerk on the internet. He hosts the most read blog against climate science. I also wrote a few comments at The Pointman to which he responded very impolitely. That guy is indeed not worth a post, even if WUWT and Prof Curry think this bad manners are worth referring their readers to.<br /><br />On the other hand, it is also not a schoolyard fight. Watts cannot touch me. And like I wrote in principle 1., I do not expect to be able to convince him. He will die with his opinion, there is nothing anyone can do, there is nothing that can happen to change that. But it is nice to be able to comment on WUWT so that some of the readers can find their way back into the light. If I am moderated, he can expect to find a question here why. Comments I make there are archived.<br /><br />My audience is certainly not the top 7% dismissives. They are beyond help and likely do not appreciate my honesty. Most of the communication with normal people is in private, on forums and in the comments of newspapers. I hope to be able to help these people by providing them with background information.Victor Venemahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02842816166712285801noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9093436161326155359.post-69859379216201559912014-06-14T02:35:55.967+01:002014-06-14T02:35:55.967+01:00Hi Victor,
Your final six principles of blogs ma...Hi Victor, <br /><br />Your final six principles of blogs make good sense to me, but the whole issue raises some questions about what science blogs are really for, who is the target audience, and so on. This post got me thinking about why it is that I made your blog one of my regulars -there are three main reasons. <br /><br />First, your discussions of interesting developments in climate science are quite clear.<br /><br />Second, I find you are very frank about your personal experience as a scientists, which I think is an important contribution.<br /><br />Third, you have taken an interest in the wider philosophical approach to scientific knowledge -which of course gives me something to talk about with you (so I get to feel like a contributor). :)<br /><br />But I'm not sure how the blog benefits from sharing your adventures in the 'science-as-bar fight-world'.<br /><br />Long before the internet, it was true that if you wanted to change a person's mind, you spoke to them patiently in a private setting. As a rule, one would not think to do so in public, with a crowd watching to see one party or the other give in and lose face. But every debate on twitter or the internet is like a schoolyard fight, taking place in the middle of an excited mob. What are the odds that someone puffing their chest defiantly is ever going to really communicate? It isn't even a real conversation.<br /><br />That's what your description of WUWT sounds like to me -and the twitter feed too. Victor, that stuff would drive me nuts! For my part, I only hope it doesn't waste too much of your time, because demonstrating that the internet is full of jerks is kind of beneath somebody who has as much to offer as you do. <br /><br /><br /><br /><br /><br /> Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15427410783634375334noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9093436161326155359.post-91319791426422852742014-06-13T21:11:29.764+01:002014-06-13T21:11:29.764+01:00This is a link to the Watts up with That comment, ...This is a link to the Watts up with That comment, that words (Hitler,etc) are quoted from above.<br /><br />http://www.webcitation.org/incrediblyunlikelyfliename.1.html#comment-1652661<br /><br />most of them are in a quote from another blog, and I think the comment is more nuanced than made out here.<br /><br />Barry WoodsAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9093436161326155359.post-27505535396196257362014-06-13T09:03:37.096+01:002014-06-13T09:03:37.096+01:00Zeke, I'm surprised you characterize that effo...Zeke, I'm surprised you characterize that effort as having been successful in a sense other than many of them being polite to you.<br /><br />Denial is still denial, with the exact same implications for progress on policy, whether that denial is based on physics denial of one sort or another, or on a more sophisticated denial of high sensitivity, damaging effect of impacts or timing of impacts. People who like to think of themselves as smart and informed on the subject will choose one of the latter.<br /><br />I read through some of the comments and I saw no evidence of anyone changing their mind. Most of the supportive remarks were from people known to not be deniers. <br /><br />(BTW, I don't fit in any of your categories.) Steve Bloomhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12943109973917998380noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9093436161326155359.post-28549185212197819672014-06-12T19:53:00.767+01:002014-06-12T19:53:00.767+01:00No, I would not call it uncivil yet, but let's...No, I would not call it uncivil yet, but let's say it does sound like you are no longer a friend of the family. They are even remarkably friendly to me below this one post.Victor Venemahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02842816166712285801noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9093436161326155359.post-38036890636383195062014-06-12T19:49:22.828+01:002014-06-12T19:49:22.828+01:00If you think the commenters on WUWT are uncivil to...If you think the commenters on WUWT are uncivil towards me, you should see the folks on Steve Goddard's blog :-p<br /><br />A big part of effective science blogging is having a thick skin, for better or worse.Zekehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09757819498566612533noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9093436161326155359.post-41036653277111069912014-06-12T19:40:59.239+01:002014-06-12T19:40:59.239+01:00Hi Zeke, I only looked through the first few comme...Hi Zeke, I only looked through the first few comment, but it is interesting how many people agree with you. And no profanity. <br /><br />If Anthony Watts or Roy Spencer claim that CO2 is a greenhouse gas, they get almost 100% complaints in their comments. Also the Tea Party Conservatives are almost unanimously certain that humans have no influence on the climate, which is almost the same as claiming that CO2 is not a greenhouse gas.<br /><br />You must be doing something right. Although at the last WUWT post on homogenization, people do not treat you that respectful.Victor Venemahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02842816166712285801noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9093436161326155359.post-11246975092338404932014-06-12T18:54:25.738+01:002014-06-12T18:54:25.738+01:00I did a nice experiment in finding common ground t...I did a nice experiment in finding common ground that was (somewhat) successful a few years back:<br /><br />http://rankexploits.com/musings/2011/agreeing/<br />http://judithcurry.com/2011/02/26/agreeing/<br />http://judithcurry.com/2011/02/28/agreeing-part-ii/<br /><br />I think those three post combined got around 2,500 comments. <br />Zekehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09757819498566612533noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9093436161326155359.post-4189897977741043512014-06-10T15:02:09.261+01:002014-06-10T15:02:09.261+01:00ATTP, Rachel, thank you.
Twitter button added.ATTP, Rachel, thank you.<br /><br />Twitter button added.Victor Venemahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02842816166712285801noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9093436161326155359.post-83444127379680788442014-06-10T08:48:39.818+01:002014-06-10T08:48:39.818+01:00Great post, Victor. Now how do I tweet it? Where i...Great post, Victor. Now how do I tweet it? Where is the tweet button? Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9093436161326155359.post-77682904951272053462014-06-09T22:00:28.744+01:002014-06-09T22:00:28.744+01:00Good post. I see we're largely thinking along...Good post. I see we're largely thinking along the same lines.And Then There's Physicshttp://andthentheresphysics.wordpress.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-9093436161326155359.post-61634600420999200022014-06-09T19:12:09.919+01:002014-06-09T19:12:09.919+01:00Eli, that was a nice test to see if I would remove...Eli, that was a nice test to see if I would remove argument-free negative comments.Victor Venemahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02842816166712285801noreply@blogger.com