It looks like Dr. Judith Curry has decided to start down the road of climate blogging. This should be an interesting experience and I’m glad that someone else in climate science is willing to address concerns of the public in a direct fashion.
It looks like Dr. Judith Curry has decided to start down the road of climate blogging. This should be an interesting experience and I’m glad that someone else in climate science is willing to address concerns of the public in a direct fashion.
the Air Vent 
She’s going to have 3 categories, roughly technical, political, and open.
Good luck with that!
Judith Curry and Tom Fuller seem to have started on paths that may uncircle some of the wagons in the AGW camp. Good for them. It’s another sign of rational thinking choking off the hype machine that’s been running for a decade or more.
I’m less than optimistic regarding Curry: she’s a believer. Tom has long been in the non-alarmist camp from what I gather so there’s no uncircling to be had from him..
Mark
I see you lost no time in adding her to your blogroll. Should be interesting to see how she handles the blog, which I suspect may turn into a troll magnet.
Jeff,
Thanks for the link to Dr Curry’s blog – should be interesting given her acceptance of the warming gospel.
#3
Now be kind to Dr. Curry, RC excommunicated her just last month over Bishop Hills book 🙂
To quote Bishop Hill. (a good sense of humour)
“Judith Curry has decided to formalise her longstanding campaign to get people on both sides of the global warming debate to fling foul abuse at her. Her new blog is called Climate etc .
Welcome to the blogsphere Judy!”
http://bishophill.squarespace.com/blog/2010/9/11/judy-blogs.html
I just put this onto Watts Up. Hope you don’t mind the repitition.
————————-
Please be nice/polite to Judith..
I have come to realise she has the very best scientific intentions..
Everyone here, may not agree with her on many things…
But by the shear amount of grief and vitriol poured onto her, by the commentors at RealClimate, Stoat (Judith Curry jumps the shark), Deltoid, and many other, shows she has an open mind, particulary after she challenged them to read.
‘The Hockey Stick Illusion’ – A W Montford – aka Bishop Hill blog.
Lets us very sceptical people of the CAGW delusion extend her the utmost courtesy, if ONLY to show up the other ‘extreme’ CAGW side of the debate….
AND, If the other ‘extreme’ side of the debate, then decides to be courteous as well (less they look bad) then we have all won, at least to the extent a civilised debate can start…
Possibly around these comments from a UK Member of Parliament, with respect to one of the ‘climategate enquiries, that is being used to sya, the science is vindicated…..
‘That is NOT SCIENCE, but LITERATURE”
(ref Briffa and the fact that not even Briffa/CRU could reproduce his OWN results)
MP Graham Stringer in full…
He is important, a member of the House of Commons Science and Technology Select Committee questioning Lord Oxburgh (Oxburgh Climategate enquiry)
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2010/09/10/oxburgh_science_select_committee/page2.html
The Register:
Stringer says the practices exposed at CRU undermine the scientific value of paleoclimatology, in which CRU is a world leader.
“When I asked Oxburgh if [Keith] Briffa [CRU academic] could reproduce his own results, he said in lots of cases he couldn’t.
“That just isn’t science. It’s literature. If somebody can’t reproduce their own results, and nobody else can, then what is that work doing in the scientific journals?”
————————–
Some comments and analysis of the above at Harmless Sky blog.
Lord Oxburgh caught in the headlights
http://ccgi.newbery1.plus.com/blog/?p=327#comments
Josh (cartoons) has a new one as well… (Judith Curry – backing up Andrew Montford)
http://bishophill.squarespace.com/blog/2010/9/12/josh-40.html
Barry Woods:
Being criticized doesn’t mean one’s right. Being criticized also doesn’t mean one’s ‘open-minded’.
Instead of extolling the so-called virtues of ‘open-mindedness’, it may be better to extol the real virtues of facts, in contrast to vague bullshit and insinuations. What d’ ya think, Barry? How about some facts?
Why is the Global Warming Policy Foundation’s supposed report on the inquiry into the “Climategate” inquiries still nowhere in sight? I thought Andrew Montford said that the report would be up by the end of August?
— frank
Update – her blog is great. Really objective scientific debate that is now attracting some of the big guns of climate science. The technical debate is forthright but (mainly) polite and absolutely compelling for the layman observer wishing to learn more. Check it out.