RC Explains

In a response to a post (#441 on the What George Will Should Have Written thread) at RC by ‘truth’, Gavin shed some light on RC’s moderating policy.  The whole exchange follows:

truth Says:
13 mars 2009 at 9:02 AM

Re [414] Response to RodB:

Gavin, what you allow to be posted and what you edit out speaks for you too—not just your direct remarks.

Allowing some who are passionate AGW proponents to make statements of absolute certainty, along with their venom and vitriol and smearing of dissenters, without comment from you or other moderators, while on the other hand censoring out from dissenters’ posts the mildest of remarks  [or often censoring out their posts [made in reply to their critics]in their entirety]—is a tacit endorsement by the moderators of the certainty expressed by the AGW commenters.

Eg: a commenter on one of your other topics said, ‘Scientists who fail to communicate the alarming reality of  Anthropogenic Global Warming are doing the public a great disservice’, implying that it’s the duty of all scientists to go forth and preach and promote the certainty. There was no reply or comment from the moderators.

And, even more directly, in one of your other posts, Mike made it clear in his reply to a commenter. The commenter was describing a previous Lou Dobbs show, saying that Dobbs said ‘On my show, global warming is happening and we are causing it. That’s not for debate. I want to hear what we should do about it.’   The commenter said he believed some scientists from RC were there, and said, ‘No sceptics or deniers were included.’, and expressed a hope for a return to that happy and much more acceptable state by Dobbs.  Mike replied ‘Yes, this was myself, Gavin and Alan Robock’—and agreed that it was a shame that Dobbs had changed.  That would seem to me to be an expression of the moderators’ expectations that the media should stifle the debate for them—nip it in the bud, as Dobbs did on that occasion—a situation that prevails in Australia, as journalists almost never interview any person who can’t be relied upon to express certainty on AGW——it just doesn’t happen.

[Response: This is really getting tiresome. ‘Debate’ is not just contradiction. There are plenty of interesting things to  discuss and very varied points of view among the mainstream without having some idiot come on and assert that the world is flat. The people who aren’t worth including in any discussion are the people who can’t go a single sentence without throwing in some tired old cliche about the Vikings or how water vapor is really the most important greenhouse gas or that they grew wine in medieval England don’t you know… This isn’t debate, this is noise. And I have no problem with saying that this discussion needs less noise, not more. You appear to be persuaded otherwise, and indeed your actions demonstrate a commitment to that. Find a serious ‘contrarian’ – one that doesn’t lace their statements with nonsense, and you’ll find someone perhaps worth interviewing. But these are pretty thin on the ground – if they exist at all. – gavin]


2 Responses to “RC Explains”

  1. TCO Says:

    I think overall RC is much tougher on skeptics than CA is on alarmists…although both places have a tendancy to allow sins by those who are on the blog’s “side”.

    Gavin also has a good point on the lack of serious skeptics. McI would be one of the closest and even he doesn’t even bother to publish white papers. And the wine in England types are thick as theives. And tolerated by McI and such. He tries to not get trapped into supporting them. But he won’t call them out either. Look at Watts doing the server for CA and then having the silliest of silly silly solar theories. It’s obvious that there is a social phenomenon going on. And criticising your own side is traitorous.

  2. rcrejects Says:

    Hey TCO. Thanks for your posts. It took me a while to find them in the spam filter and to dig them out. T’was the first time I had done that!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: