Climate Blogger Censored by New York Times

I’ve been thrown out of better.   It seems that my commentary was unwelcome at the New York Times.   Last night – at around 3 am – I left a comment in reply to Paul Krugman’s post on the bad people wanting to prosecute scientists.   Ironically, the post was centered on an issue of disclosure, privacy and indirectly free speech.  Titled – American Thought Police – in reference to the evil Republican requests for emails from some political rivals.  Where he goes wrong is to chuck in this little tidbit h/t Bishop Hill:

Back in 2009 climate skeptics got hold of more than a thousand e-mails between researchers at the Climate Research Unit at Britain’s University of East Anglia. Nothing in the correspondence suggested any kind of scientific impropriety; at most, we learned — I know this will shock you — that scientists are human beings, who occasionally say snide things about people they dislike.

Of course I couldn’t resist so I left a comment.   We all know that Krugman’s ilk are nothing but extremists who consider their own intellect well beyond that of mere citizens.  After all, he did receive a Nobel prize, of course so did Arafat.  Can anyone name the last time the economics prize was given to a conservative instead of yet another statist?

I do agree with much of his point, however the climategate bit was incredibly biased crap.  So I left this:

“Nothing in the correspondence suggested any kind of scientific impropriety; ”

You need to read the context of course, and of course you have already made up your mind, but BS sir.

Guess what, scientists are human and can also be pressured into making false scientific conclusions by money and fame. No, not that global warming is fake, but in the ‘hide the decline’ case the data was not good temperature data. They knew it and instead of admitting the problem, they covered up the problem through unjustifiably throwing out data which didn’t match their intended conclusions. It didn’t stop there though, then they went about replacing it with other data to make the shape they wanted. Another hockey stick temperature curve was born.

I suppose you can write what you want, I just wish people didn’t have to read the constant propaganda from a major news source.

I left it at 3 am when there were few comments on the article.  Since that time, over 500 comments were allowed, several with wild ass critiques of Krugman, never reading the emails and with little understanding.    Guess who didn’t make the cut?

It was odd that I saved the comment.  I’ve commented strongly at NYT a lot of times and never saved it.  The remarks and commentary in the thread were so left wing whacko though that I suspected they would be censor happy if someone made a strong point.  My comment was still in moderation at 5pm today with 501 comments – most afterward.  Two hours later — it’s gone.

Oddly enough, I also took a screenshot, just to make sure there was proof.  It is odd because I’ve only taken one other comment screenshot that I remember and it was after being repeatedly snipped at RC.

Left at 3am -- Note the in moderation message which lasted all day long. Only tonight did it finally disappear. Also note that there were only 27 comments at that point.

So, there you have it, another whacko, complaining about thought police/free speech and whatever else, tosses a flat lie about climategate in the mix and censors one of the people who does understand the issue.  Actually, tAV was one of only two blogs I know of which complained of the false clipping of data well before ‘hide the decline’ became famous.

What do I know though.