Apart from writing some blog posts here (and thanks to MT and others, I’ve had to write fewer than normal) I’ve largely been staying out of the whole online climate debate; ignoring the ClimateballTM mantra that the only losing move is to not play the game. It has, I will admit, been very pleasant. I think, though, that I’ve become a little complacent, as I’ve recently drifted back in. As a consequence I’ve been accussed of writing an appalling comment on another blog, under someone else’s name, before we’d ever interacted, so that I could use it against them now. I’ve learned that calling someone a twat is okay, but “denier” is totally unacceptable. I’m not sure if this is “denier” specifically, or if this also applies to “climate science denier”, “denial”, “climate science denial”, and other possible variants. I didn’t try to clarify.
So, since I’ve been getting back a bit into the climate wars, I thought I would advertise a new blog venture. It’s called Climate Scepticism and appears to be a group of people who I shall politely call “sceptics”. I can’t quite tell if it is simply a site for like-minded people to discuss Climategate, and complain about Michael Mann, or if it really is an attempt to open up some kind of dialogue. There is certainly a post about restarting the climate debate, although it does appear to be more an indication of their lack of understanding of how models are used in the physical sciences, than anything particularly insightful.
However, even if they have a goal of restarting the debate, I doubt I’d be very welcome. The typical response to me making a comment on a site like that is for people to complain about how I run my blog and to then call me various uncomplementary names. Not that I mind, but it does tend to make it difficult to have any kind of serious discussion, and you do end up wasting an awful lot of time arguing with people you’d really rather never have encountered in the first place. I thought, though, that others might have more success than I suspect I would have. I’m not hugely optimistic about how it would go, but I’m always happy to be proven wrong. I might be rather cynical about the merits of trying to restart the debate, but I have no objection to others trying to do so, and would not be disappointed if others were to have more success than I’ve had. If anyone does give it a try, let me know how it goes.