OK ren, this is the place for your interesting comments and graphics.
Archive for the ‘Blog’ Category
There will be no Bloggies this year, an era ends, life changes.
2001 .. 2015 is good going.
The Weblog Awards
After 15 years, I have decided to bring the Weblog Awards to a close. Visitor participation has declined to the point where there just aren’t enough nominees to form a broad enough spectrum of competition.
Thanks to all of those who supported the Bloggies in one way or another. I’m proud we were able to create such a notable ceremony without advertising or corporate sponsorship.
I congratulate all the winners of the past fifteen years and look forward to seeing how blogs will evolve in the future.
I agree with NIkolai’s analysis, there has to be “critical mass” for a group to hang together, a lesson I learnt 20 to 30 years ago.
Seasons greetings and happy holidays to everyone!
This is the Talkshop Christmas open thread, for whatever you’d like to discuss.
Best European Weblog: Not a Lot of People Know That
Congratulations are due to Paul Homewood, no surprise given his steamroller work, does he sleep?
The Talkshop bows to winner ClimateAudit, Lifetime Acheivement. We make do with finalist 2015.
The Bloggie Finalists for 2015
I assume double finalist will come as a surprise to Paul Homewood who is on a roll at the moment.
RealClimate and WUWT in the same finalist catagory, oops, again.
Peter Morecambe: Institutional Climate Science, Prospects for Independent Researchers and Some ResultsPosted: December 16, 2014 by tallbloke in Analysis, Astrophysics, atmosphere, Big Brother, Blog, Celestial Mechanics, Cycles
Tags: james hansen, kyoto, Scafetta
Guest post from Peter Morecambe aka ‘Galloping Camel’
The Kyoto Protocol
Elites around the world tend to believe that rising levels of CO2 in our atmosphere will cause catastrophic climate changes. Collectively they wield enough power to shape energy policies in many nations according to commitments laid down in the “Kyoto Protocol” and subsequent accords. It is interesting to compare the fate of the Kyoto Protocol based on the work of “Climate Scientists” such as Michael Mann with that of the Montreal Protocol based on the work of people like McElroy.
The Montreal Protocol essentially banned the production of Freon and similar compounds based on the prediction that this would reduce the size of the polar “Ozone Holes”. After the ban went into effect the size of the ozone holes diminished. This may mean that the science presented by McElroy and his cohorts was “Robust” or it may be dumb luck. Either way, McElroy has credibility and “Skeptics” are ridiculed. The Kyoto Protocol did not fare so well.
I’ve been out of the loop for a while, initially due to being away on holiday, then by a round of job interviews I had to prepare for (no success there), and finally by the hospitalisation of my dear old dad (he’s improving now). I’m immensely grateful to my co-bloggers Tim, Stuart (Oldbrew) and Andrew, who have been minding the shop and putting up lots of interesting articles during my absence – thanks guys.
This period has shown more than ever that the talkshop isn’t a one man band, but a vibrant community of bloggers, contributors, commenters and readers. The theory we are working on is moving along in the background as well as on the blog, along with a couple of other related developments I’ll be able to disclose in due course.
Co-moderator writes: as is my way I jury rig workarounds for limitations, what engineering people do. String, sealing wax, knotted handkerchiefs. And… simple so it is understood.
Click the image, preset Google search opens, add your search words at the end and go find.
New? I’ve not seen this done before.
A gentle reminder to our readers.
There are still a few days left to vote Voting ends tonight in this years Bloggies. We have been selected as finalists in the ‘Best European Weblog’ section. Thanks for your consideration.
Voting for the Bloggies 2014
- Saturday, March 1
Finalists are announced and voting reopens to all to choose the winners.
- Sunday, March 23
10:00 PM EDT (early Monday morning European time)
- Monday, March 31
8:00 PM EDT
Winners are announced and the Weblog of the Year receives a prize of 2,014 US cents (US$20.14).
Lets have a look focussing on blogs we know well, no offence meant to others.
Bloggies 2014 finalists (list at end of page there)
|Weblog of the Year|
|*No Frakking Consensus|
|Travel Geek Magazine|
|The Modern Nomad|
|*Watts Up With That?|
Tony Thomas wrote this article a while back in February. I didn’t repost it at that time, but a recent post on ‘the Conversation’ drawn to my attention yesterday (H/T whoever it was – sorry I can’t remember), makes it apropos. The Conversation’s strap line is ‘Academic Rigour – Journalistic flair’. Even as the APS reconsiders IPCC science and it’s position statement on climate change, the publicly funded activists at the Conversation discuss how to ‘drown out’ ‘deniers’…
A rather one-sided conversation
Tony Thomas – 14-2-2014
Staffed by left-leaning refugees from commercial news organisations’ withered operations, largely publicly funded and lavishly so, the online pulpit for academics to bang their favourite drums has little sympathy for those who doubt the planet is melting
The lavishly-funded leftist blog for academia, The Conversation, has hired a new manager specifically to make contributors converse more politely. Cory Zanoni, an RMIT psychology graduate and social media guru, got the job of Community Manager in January. He was hired after complaints last year about vulgar comments on the articles with the responsibility for ‘creating a space for intelligent discussion’.
We can do this. Today, people around the world are coming together to say no more.
GCHQ in the UK and the NSA in America are hoovering up your personal data when you visit websites, send emails and texts, make calls and use social media and sharing the data with each other.
When I first heard these revelations from Edward Snowden, it was overwhelming. Now though, we’ve got an ambitious plan to change UK surveillance for good.
The Day We Fight Back is today.
Around ten days ago I made an enquiry to Copernicus (the innovative science unpublishers) asking when they would be billing me for the order I made at the end of 2013. It turned out they had forgotten to do so, and they provided an invoice for a fresh order on Jan 27, 10 days after they axed the journal.
On Tuesday, internet users all over the world are standing up to say no to GCHQ and the NSA’s mass surveillance. Over the last eight months we’ve heard plenty about how intelligence agencies monitor us on the Internet.
Our surveillance laws have let the intelligence agencies extend their reach deep into our private lives.Tuesday 11th February is The Day We Fight Back.
It seems that the Bloggies have decided to axe the ‘Best science or technology blog’ category this year, probably due to the amount of earache the organisers were getting from the usual suspects about the climate sceptic blogs consistently packing the category finals. So I thought I’d get my own back by publishing a comparison of global traffic rank for the talkshop vs flagship global warming science site realclimate.org
Stitch that Gavin.
But surely Realclimate will beat the tiny Talkshop on its home turf in the US? Let’s have a look:
An Unbelievable Decision
Handling editor of the Special Issue of PRP
The idea that the planetary motions affect and control the solar variability is old, but in the stage of an unproven hypothesis. In recent years major advancements have occurred and in 2013, it seemed that time was ripe for a major, multi-authored, reinvestigation. Therefore, a Special Issue of Pattern Recognition in Physics was devoted to: “Pattern in solar variability, their planetary origin and terrestrial impacts”.
The volume includes 12 separate research papers and General Conclusions, co-authored by 19 prominent scientists. Indeed, they agreed that the driving factor of solar variability must emerge from the planetary beat on the Sun, and by that its emission of luminosity and Solar Wind both factors of which affect the Earth-Moon system.
The Bloggies are underway again, and the 2014 award nominations have been open since Jan 1. There are a few days left before nominations close on Friday.
I was dismayed this morning to find Anthony Watts had chosen to end strained but outwardly reasonably polite relations with me by throwing down a gauntlet I had no option but to respond to on a comment chain starting last night. This stuff goes back two years, and has been brought to a head by the recent smear campaign Willis Eschenbach and Anthony Watts have launched against the group of honest scientists I have been working with on our special edition of Pattern recognition in physics. The comments reproduced below are from a new thread where Willis Eschenbach misrepresents the work of Professor Jan-Erik Solheim, (University of Oslo Inst of Theoretical Astrophysics) who contributed two papers to our special edition.
January 22, 2014 at 8:31 am
Nicola Scafetta says:
January 22, 2014 at 7:43 am
[snip – you are welcome to resumbit without the ad homs – mod]
Yes Nicola, behave yourself on his Nibs thread. Here’s an example of the sort of thing you can’t say:
“Copernicus, as a publisher of scientific journals, cannot afford to become known as a place where reviewers don’t review and editors don’t edit”
There’s nothing like a good strong ethics controversy to sort out friends from foes, and the last five days have been decisive in laying out the battle lines. The trouble started when James Annan whipped up an email campaign directed at science publisher Copernicus, complaining about our Special Edition of Pattern Recognition in Physics. Although the various proponent authors of the Planetary Solar Theory have different ideas about viable mechanisms we came to the same conclusions via different phenomenological methods: that an imminent solar slowdown is upon us, and it is likely to be deeper than the Dalton Minimum, possibly stretching until the latter decades of this century.
In the General conclusions paper all the contributing authors signed, we agreed that “This sheds serious doubts on the issue of a continued, even accelerated, warming as claimed by the IPCC project”. This did not please the proponents of the ‘trace gas levels control Earth’s climate’ theory, AKA cAGW, and emails trickled into Copernicus headquarters in Gottingen, Germany.