I had a new visitor here today with the tag “Skeptikal”. While he was slightly critical that I am not writing about interesting papers as I had mentioned in my “About” section and was instead focusing on deniers, he was nonetheless quite polite. As is the usual case with new arrivals here, the first comment always ends up in moderation and every subsequent comment is automatically published as long as it doesn’t contain more than two links. Here is his first comment…
No problems there. So far, I have only ever had an issue with one first comment, which I still made a point of publishing, albeit snipped, to make an example. Here it is…
Finally, there is only one person who I have banned from commenting and that was for continued deliberate refusal to follow the rules of my blog. It had absolutely nothing to do with the “arguments” he was putting forward. I am more than happy to discuss anything as long as the rules are followed and censoring comments is not in my nature. I have been the victim of that nonsense at a few denier dens and I will not stoop to that level. So, back to Skeptikal. I was most surprised to see so many referrals coming from Bob Tisdale’s site so I popped over for a look and what did I see?
Now, there’s only two possibilities here. The first is that he actually has made a comment and it is lost in the ether somewhere. The other option is that he’s lying. The first is possible I suppose but I know for sure it didn’t come here. I am always notified of every comment and I also check every spam message every day to make sure nothing has slipped through. Having been through this sort of garbage with Geoffrey Brown from the Climate Sceptics Party accusing me of censorship (I caught him out lying through his teeth about it) I am highly suspicious of Skeptikal. Is he trying to set me up? Is he trying to curry favour and get a pat on the head from his hero Bob? Who knows? All I know, is I don’t censor people and I certainly wouldn’t censor any comment about Bob Tisdale. He’s a very welcome topic of conversation here. Yep, good old Bob (I don’t believe in peer review, here buy my book, let’s conveniently ignore the Arctic) Tisdale is a very welcome topic indeed.
So, Skeptikal if you happen to be back here reading this, feel free to explain yourself. I’m all ears and I definitely won’t censor your comment.
UPDATE: Well it seems that Skeptikal has managed to (clarify) things. Apparently his comment about my warm fuzzy feeling this blog gives me was his first comment here that he claimed to Bob was about Bob not paying attention to sea ice. Interesting. I’m sort of reminded of the standard television joke where someone asks a hard of hearing person a question and regardless, the answer is “Oh about quarter to three.” So I guess I failed to make the connection. I have naturally informed Skeptikal in the comments section of this post that I accept his explanation and so have made this amendment here. Of course I did mention that this is the part where he rushes around boasting that he got me to change something, as he has done before. For example…
Amusing, very amusing. I like how he couldn’t even spell the word “fascist” right.
“So, Skeptikal if you happen to be back here reading this, feel free to explain yourself. I’m all ears and I definitely won’t censor your comment.”
Firstly, thanks. I’ve never had a blog dedicated to me before. It makes me feel somehow important.
The first comment I made on bob tisdale’s site was while my first comment here was awaiting moderation. I made that comment on his site as some pro-AGW sites are very fussy in what comments they allow. Admittedly, I failed to explicitly mention in my second comment there that my comments here were passing moderation… although if you read the second comment carefully, you’ll notice I made mention of commenting here, so there would be the assumption that my comments here weren’t being rejected.
I’m not convinced that global warming is man-made… hence the name “skeptikal”. Having said that, I didn’t come here to be abusive or annoying. I just like to look at what’s happening on both sides of the “climate debate” fence. I use the same name everywhere, and don’t try to hide the fact I visit sites on both sides of the debate.
I stand by what I said in your ‘about’ blog…. if you were using this website to give your insight into interesting science papers you have read, it really would make for more interesting reading than what you’re using the site for now.
I tend to gravitate to sites which have actual content on the subject of global warming, and you can see in my comments on tisdale’s site that I’m a bit disappointed with the content in this site. I’ll visit here from time to time to see if you have anything worth reading, but blog sites with the only content being bagging the people they don’t agree with isn’t really what I’m looking for.
As for being a bootlicker… well, you can believe whatever you want to believe.
Nice try at an explanation. The issue is that you mentioned in your comment over at Bob’s, that you made a comment here about his “not paying attention to sea ice” and that it would be “interesting to see if it gets through moderation” No such comment arrived here. I think perhaps you were hoping I block comments and that I wouldn’t go back and visit Bob’s to see your comment and you’ve been caught out. Whatever.
Interesting that you say some pro AGW sites are fussy about the comments that appear. All of the AGW sites I visit are filled with denier comments. Granted, some of them get snipped for various reasons, usually for the same reasons that I snip. I’ve been blocked from numerous sites denier sites and heavily moderated in others. It goes with the general paranoia that many deniers display in their distrust of scientists, the government, anyone who disagrees with their distorted views. It’s similar to what happens on Youtube with young earth creationists. They either block all comments completely or allow only the comments that sit with their distortion. Can’t have anyone telling them that the the world is old or that Noah and his family would have been too sick to steer the boat and feed the animals with their multitude of obligate human parasites. Blocking comments is akin to sticking fingers in ears. The practice is far more common on denier sites.
As for your disappointment in my conten? meh. My role isn’t to convert deniers or give them science that they won’t understand. That is a lost cause. My goal is to highlight the silliness, the scientific illiteracy, the dirty tactics, the wilful ignorance and the dishonesty that deniers engage in so that visitors who might be unsure about climate change can critically evaluate which side is putting forward the truth.
So, come back from time to time and be disappointed if you like. You seem to be intelligent. Perhaps you might question your denial.
Skeptikal ” don’t try to hide the fact I visit sites on both sides of the debate.”
caught out lying my friend, you stated that you would not visit skepticalscience because popfart told you not to,
you kid yourself
Pingback: Denier comment of the day September 10, 2012 | uknowispeaksense
Pingback: Denier comment of the day September 12, 2012 | uknowispeaksense