Romm censors almost 100% of skeptical comments. Gavin censors plenty of comments too.
They adopt the policies of the Soviet Union, because they represent the same big government interests. And because they have plenty to hide.
Disrupting the Borg is expensive and time consuming!
Google Search
-
Recent Posts
- Michael Mann Hurricane Update
- Michael Mann Hurricane Update
- Making Themselves Irrelevant
- Michael Mann Predicts The Demise Of X
- COP29 Preview
- UK Labour To Save The Planet
- A Giant Eyesore
- CO2 To Destroy The World In Ten Years
- Rats Jumping Off The Climate Ship
- UK Labour To Save The Planet
- “False Claims” And Outright Lies”
- Michael Mann Cancelled By CNN
- Spoiled Children
- Great Lakes Storm Of November 11, 1835
- Harris To Win Iowa
- Angry Democrats
- November 9, 1913 Storm
- Science Magazine Explains Trump Supporters
- Obliterating Bill Gates
- Scientific American Editor In Chief Speaks Out
- The End Of Everything
- Harris To Win In A Blowout
- Election Results
- “Glaciers, Icebergs Melt As World Gets Warmer”
- “falsely labeling”
Recent Comments
- Greg in NZ on Michael Mann Hurricane Update
- czechlist on Michael Mann Hurricane Update
- Disillusioned on Michael Mann Hurricane Update
- arn on Michael Mann Hurricane Update
- conrad ziefle on Michael Mann Hurricane Update
- arn on Michael Mann Hurricane Update
- Billyjack on COP29 Preview
- dm on Michael Mann Hurricane Update
- dm on Michael Mann Hurricane Update
- Tel on COP29 Preview
Why are we surprised that they have no integrity?
They try to show us every single day!
Yeah, the “freedom of speech” crowd has always had a bit of a tense relationship with freedom of speech.
(1917: finally, freedom!; 1932: finally, freedom!; 1949: finally, freedom!; & cet & cet (we could probably also include 1789 in that))
Romm is an idiot whose antics I don’t follow. If you never brought him up I’d not know he hasn’t [snip]
When one is from MIT, one has to be read between the lines to understand their pithiness. WHich you obviously did not, neither can I
Steven said:
Thank you – I really don’t like that guy didn’t have the heart to snip it myself. Great to know your moral compass is in good order. Seriously.
Seems censoring critical comments is ubiquitous amongst alarmists…
see the following,
http://abcnewswatch.blogspot.com/2011/07/slurred-by-coral-whisperer.html
Like high priests in any cult, the likes of Romm and Schmidt will do everything in their power to prevent True Believers from learning the truth.
On the few occasions I’ve been moved to actually visit Romm’s site (I make it my business to read linked articles before assessing comment in a blog post) I didn’t get past the first one or two sentences. When I was young(er) and foolish, I commented in just two sentences at unRealClimate. My comment was emasculated by Gavin with THREE insertions – one at the beginning, to make me look like an idiot, one between the two sentences, and one at the end, to mis-summarise what I’d said. A regular even made a mild protest at this a little later. The following day, BOTH comments had been removed.
Don’t complain, at least you got the WISE ONE’S attention.
Your summary is dead on. I just wish others would make that logical leap about those wanting big government as well. The more government, the less freedom.
Ah, he’s post-moderating. I can post most anything there, even late night edgy rants and they stay up for quite some time but now seem to be gone. I think his lack of site traffic and lack of a quick moderator means he has decided to let people post back and forth to keep his readership up. That nobody there responds to my posts anyway, even when they stay posted several hours, means this policy doesn’t threaten to screw up long threads. It’s just one big fawning festive there. He must get quite an ego boost from all the pats on the back he gets for sporting a green halo. It could of course be that the site software just shows comments appearing when really they are in a moderation queue? I’ll check with my iPhone, on a different IP address:
http://thinkprogress.org/romm/2011/07/12/252224/gops-dirty-bulb-bill-burns-out/
Ugh…the site detects I’m on an iPhone and spits out a mobile version lacking comments, even when I identify the browser as a desktop version, so I can’t check.
DeSmogBlog these days, however, is not moderating heavily, though one of my posts of James Hoggan quotes got me IP redirected for a month, and that site does have a lot of activism going on in comments. A guy on Tamino’s blog was lamenting these sites, including one I hadn’t heard of by Coby Beck (http://scienceblogs.com/illconsidered/):
“This is not the only problem. Various blogs which claim to support the science of AGW allow un-moderated comments on their blogs. Since these dishonest denier shills get moderated on the good science blogs they tend to move onto the un-moderated blogs. These pro-AGW sites then become echo-chambers for the AGW deniers. It gets so time consuming trying to respond to all the denier nonsense that most people just give up on these blogs and allow the deniers to have a far greater influence than they should have.” – mrnkalon (http://tamino.wordpress.com/2011/06/24/mike-mann-responds/)
RealClimate actually allowed me to post my sea level poster (!) today though, with no inline reply, so we’ll see if anybody actually has a valid way to deny that sea level according to tide gauges going back 150 years shows no trend change and thus utterly no AGW signal.
http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/2011/07/is-sea-level-rise-accelerating/comment-page-2/#comments
Maybe they let it in since I made a minor mistake about the reference to corrections?
Still in moderation is a second of my comments:
#63 Paul S referenced Chao’s claim that reservoirs have subtracted 3 cm from the sea level. I point out that this means that minus AGW-caused enhanced sea level rise, a seemingly unexplained natural dive in sea level of 3 cm has been nearly exactly avoided, due to the trend in tide gauges being so linear (larger image of the Church & White 2011 plot here: http://oi51.tinypic.com/28tkoix.jpg). That seems a bit odd, given that T has been rising in that same 150 years. Minus a mechanism for this avoided dip, the argument that actual sea level should be replaced by a virtual one is much less convincing.