Comment Policy

My policy is very straightforward. I will discuss anything with anyone, so long as you can provide evidence if you make a claim about science, so long as you are civil, and so long as you don’t come here just to tell me why I’m wrong.  Opinion stated as fact isn’t debate, it is cheating – valid discussion is only possible if people can tell the difference.

Ad hominem attacks, personal slights and insults, lies and distortions, childish behaviour and spurious “challenges” will be treated with the contempt they deserve, and deleted (unless I can make some sport out of them).

Update September 2010

I regret that due to a rash of personal remarks, stereotypical obfuscation and bizarre denialist claims, I will now have to pre-moderate all commments from new posters. I tried leaving the blog open, but many people seem to confuse free speech with cheap speech – another detrimental facet of consumerism, I suspect.

I also want to make clear my position on this subject. There are innumerable places in the blogosphere where people can attack climate change science. This isn’t one of them. Deniers, skeptics, doubters, troofers, tin-foil fans – doesn’t matter what you call them, these discussions are pointless, stupid and the bitter fruit of very questionable motives.

I want this blog to be a place where people may constructively address the problems we face. I expect my views to be challenged, but not by repeating the many failed memes of climate denial – telling me why I’m wrong to think we need to address these problems, in other words – or that the problems don’t exist.

Challenge the solutions I discuss, the nature of consumersism or the difficulties of doing good science in such a politicised climate. Do not waste your time here attacking science, scientists, me or anyone else who supports the findings of good and honest men whose work and reputations are traduced and maligned by those will far less scruples and a lot more to gain. Climate denial is the voice of the mob, writ large across the internet. I can’t silence the mob and its baying ignorance, but I can at least keep it out of my house.

This article and others connected with it have described in detail the way that, under the cover of science, reputable people are lending that reputation to statements that science does not support. These statements are part of a propaganda war, they are dishonest and serve purposes that have little or nothing to do with serious debate. I will not entertain them, or their defence, in this blog.

If you want to air your grievances, want to express your many anxieties about hockey sticks, emails, science funding, world governments, communists, socialism, the UN, Illuminati, Bilderbergers, Gore, Mann, Hansen, treehuggers, environmental nazis, tax and control and other brainless conspiracies that are as illogical as they are fearful – go somewhere else.

For the rest of my visitors, if you are looking for somewhere you don’t have to wade through mud, this is the place for you, and I hope you always feel welcome here.

Update December 2010

Discussions about moderation and censorship are no longer permitted – such discursions simply go the way of other fruitless discussions and I have no time for them. I will run this blog the way I see fit, and if anyone takes exception to the way I do things they are free to go somewhere else.