Sentences with phrase «wuwt blogs»

To borrow a line seen from time to time at the top of Anthony Watts» WUWT blogs, «people send me stuff.»

In fact you'll find that very argument made forcefully at the WUWT blog in discussion of the «consensus» papers.

Next stop was the WUWT blog.

This was brought up in the WUWT blog.

If there were 22 reasons there would not be any WUWT Blog.

The WUWT blog seemed pro-Sheldon technique instead of standard stats, so where did I miss the post reporting accelerated global warming through the last decade?

But the WUWT blog seems to like it and it reminded me of the GISTEMP results.

Not exact matches

When they keep the narrow focus they get inspired by absurdity and create blogs like WUWT.

Why do you question real scientists and trust the «quality blogs on both sides of the debate» like WUWT?

Indeed, in your capacity as a self - described «big time» guest contributor to the denialist disinformation blog WUWT, I wouldn't be surprised if you have included links in your own articles, which you would certainly expect «interested readers» to follow.

The idea that a blog post on WUWT that doesn't even deal with attribution overturns all the work on detection and attribution in the IPCC reports is laughable.

Please note that we have now published a blog post on WUWT in which we reply to your points:

It is not surprising that you find such conspiracy theories on Anthony Watts» sectarian blog WUWT, a place where climate science amateurs present earth - shattering insights to their echo chamber like: The CO2 increase is not due to burning fossil fuels, but to insects!

The answer is «the author of a blog post at WUWT entitled IPCC's Report on Climate Change: Myths & Realities ``.

Dear RC, None of you here who have written excellent and informative pieices and responses need to justify yourselves to the WUWT and other blogs of dubious intent.

What I am interested in is comparing discussion of the Cowtan paper, which to my newbie eye seems important, on this blog and on WUWT, where I imagine a skeptic discussion will crop up.

Also, if you could weigh in on whether you think these things are collapsed pingos (which seems to be the WUWT position — reason enough to doubt it, imho) and why, it could be useful in my (mostly fruitless) efforts at beating back denialists on other blogs.

I'm very sceptical of CAGW and I read WUWT every day and follow some other blogs like Climate Audit and Climate Etc. pretty routinely and I never saw anything about this survey until the paper came out.

Daily reader of WUWT and several other influential sceptic blogs.

Do you believe a careful analysis by 78 scientists or a blog post on WUWT?

Such has been the hype and exaggeration from the Daily Mail, Fox News and blogs like WUWT.

All the while this was happening there were countless posts on blogs such as WUWT claiming they were being victimised as deniers when they were not denying the basic dogma, many posts full of angst at this choice of word to describe those arguing about the science of AGW by CAGWs, and many puzzled CAGWs wondering what the heck was going on as they had used that word only to describe those denying the Greenhouse Effect Dogma.

When I read Roger Pielke Sr. blog, linked through a WUWT thread, I thought I heard something familiar: academic discourse.

Just look at the kerfuffle that happened in the comments of this blog, upon the very mention of Andrew Bolt; and it's not surprising to me that there have been distractions during the WUWT tour — Andrew Bolt and Ove Hoegh - Guldberg have had an online sparring match going on for some time.

Registered Watts Up With That (WUWT), a blog which provides «News and commentary on puzzling things in life, nature, science, weather, climate change, technology, and recent news by Anthony Watts.»

Worse, that when «a physicist» had his slander removed from WUWT because Mr. Watts didn't want the legal exposure of hosting such slander per se, «a physicist» rushed right over to this blog to repeat it and put Ms. Curry at the same risk.

Regardless of whether there was a valid reason from the blog policy for removing Fan's post, Fan's point is that other posts that break the rules such as the ones you write under the names «Latimer Alder» and «Stirling English» are allowed through because «WUWT / Watts enforces their policies selectively».

And WUWT is a fake science blog.

The most activity came on April 24 - 27, after this climate blog was the first to report on the story we called: Russian Scientist: Expect Cooling — Pols Sitting On The Wrong Horse, hours before WUWT -LSB-...]

Too many (if not all) other blogs end up as echo chambers — I include WUWT which I otherwise rate as Anthony does at least allow comment from true believers, but inevitably they are shouted down by the regulars.

You can also perhaps perceive why the two blogs I visit most often are WUWT and Bishop Hill:

Since you are a frequent visitor to WUWT, you are well aware that I have illustrated, explained, and animated cause (ENSO) and effect (the warming of sea surface temperatures, ocean heat content, lower troposphere temperatures, and land + sea surface temperatures) in dozens of blog posts over the past 3 1/2 years.

Thanks, Anthony, this was the signal event that brought me to your fine blog WUWT.

Blogs are not the point here, as the general public do not read them (and anyway WUWT is are more than offset by the nonsense from RealClimate, Deepclimate, Skeptical Science etc).

Now, I know testimonial evidence is a form of logical fallacy, and moreover a technique of propaganda, and citing works of fiction as a foundation for an argument is overdone on climate blogs overall (WUWT, Idsos, I'm lookin» at you), but documentation of international bodies in disputes should be adequate.

In 2008, WUWT won an Internet voting - based Wizbang Weblog Award for the «Best Science Blog.»

He's classified as that on Anthony Watt's site, WUWT, in that column on the right side of his blog.

There in itself is a good reason for not getting misinformation from climate crank blogs like WUWT.

- NASA assigns 2014's claim to the «warmest year» (of those under consideration) a probability of 38 % (see the chart that is a part of WUWT's January 19, 2015 blog - post «GISS and NCDC Need To Be More Forthcoming... etc.»).

In 2011, 2012, and 2013, WUWT took first place in the Bloggies «Best Science Weblog» category, and in 2013, it won overall best blog.

But a science blog like WUWT is there for that — constructive discussion.

Your second and final sentence makes an untrue assertion that Anthony Watts censors WUWT in the same manner as warmunists censor their blogs.

I slagged you off at my blog because you posted a comment at WUWT that was irrelevant and misleading: the old carbon effect in aquatic mosses has no impact on the radiocarbon dates of terrestrial mosses.

As an introduction, Many WUWT contributors and commentors forget (or ignore) that most of us followers of that blog have less than 60 college hours in Science classes.

WUWT (or, for that matter, RealClimate, or any of the climate blogs) are simply sites where various interested parties can exchange views.

I refer people to my blog by making a post on another blog for one of two reasons: 1) I want to attract people from that blog over here because I find some of the people interesting (which is why I often comment at collide - a-scape); or 2) I want my post to reach a bigger audience (which is why I often include a pointer over at WUWT).

So instead of accepting the findings as promised or explaining why he won't he doctors up a «PRESS RELEASE» (Which differs from an ordinary blog post at WUWT how?)

If any of you think I'm overreacting, I'd point out that WUWT is the single most read climate blog in the world, with tremendous influence.

Expanded climate communications Heartland plays an important role in climate communications, especially through our in - house experts (e.g., Taylor) through his Forbes blog and related high profile outlets, our conferences, and through coordination with external networks (such as WUWT and other groups capable of rapidly mobilizing responses to new scientific findings, news stories, or unfavorable blog posts).

This is not my blog, and I can not speak for Anthony, but seeing WUWT do such an amazing job countering the Warmists on the merits, it wrenches my gut every time I see posters trying to turn this site into another ignorable and inconsequential fringe hangout.