Science, Climate & Energy Forum?

Posted on 15 March 2013 by Scottish-Sceptic

After a lapse in any blogging I’ve had a rush of posts on various topics to Scottish Sceptic.  And when Climategate III came along I remembered the fun in blogging … and it seems others like Philip Bradley had the same idea. But as is my character, as soon as I saw that Philip Bradley had set up a new blog I started thinking “how can I help him”?
OBVIOUSLY  the first step is to add a few links and recommend others to go and comment on his first article.
BUT, I also felt a bit guilty encouraging someone to get involved in something that can take so much time – and often is very unrewarding.
WUWT works well because a group of people work together to create the blog. From outside, we probably don’t appreciate just how much the people get out of the group co-operation and I suspect many would be just as happy with a fraction of the readers if they maintained the same friendships.
But its not everyone’s cup of tea working in a group. Many sceptics are by nature individuals. The US is a huge place and it seems they have the critical mass to get together a group of sceptics who want to work together on a joint project.
We in the UK have Neil Craig, Tallbloke, Scottish Sceptic and other blogs whose name(s) escape me. So, it seems there is a willingness to “blog”, but perhaps not as a group. But is there anyway that we could co-operate to raise the profile of everyone?
Let’s take Philip Bardley’s blog “Aerosols and Climate“, it only takes a few minutes to set up the blog. It can take a few hours to create an article, a few days to get the hang of the blogging … all with very little help. But trying to get people to read it is an utter nightmare. And from personal experience, one never knows how “well” or “appalling” one is doing.
But a thought occurred to me … what if there were a website which hosting any number of related theme blogs? Instead of tying to get people to work as a group … vive la difference … and let everyone do their own thing … just make it easier to find them all on the one site.
What if I moved “Scottish Sceptic” to scef.org.uk? Invited a few others to create their own blogs and each blog would be a separate item on the menu … and the front page would show the latest post from of all the bloggers.
Then I wondered whether I could use the Scottish Climate & Energy Forum (scef.org.uk) site … but not every great climate activist is Scottish! Could the name be changed to make it have a wider geographical spread?
S …. Sexy Climate & Energy Forum … it would get a lot of hits.
Serious Climate & Energy Forum … a bit dry.
What about “Science, Climate & Energy Forum”?
So, I envisage a site based on Joomla, where each person has their own named page linked to from the main menu. On that page is a typical blog layout with all their recent articles. The only major difference from now is that the front page would list all the newest articles and each contributor would be expected to remove any spam or troll-type comments that get through the spam blocks.
So, the site is technically possible, the name could be changed, but would anyone want to contribute either through blogs or comments?

This entry was posted in Climate. Bookmark the permalink.

6 Responses to Science, Climate & Energy Forum?

  1. TinyCO2 says:
    16 March 2013 at 23:27

    The WordPress format is… the best phrase I can come up with is comfy. Though it’s terrible for searching old stories. I don’t have to join anything, remember my email or work out how to post.
    I do like to see posts from people who aren’t regular bloggers and the closest that works is either a discussion at Bishop Hill or if it’s logged by Tom Nelson.

  2. Mike Haseler says:
    17 March 2013 at 11:31

    I’ve just checked and it is possible with a custom wordpress install to have a single domain with multiple wordpress blogs e.g. the domain “scepticsblogs.com” could host blogs scepticblogs.com/blog1 scepticblogs.com/blog2
    However, they are entirely separate and I can’t see an easy way to amalgamate articles from several bloggers into one “superblog”.
    Joomla (as in scef.org.uk) does allow this. This isn’t wordpress, but I see many very popular sites use disqus and that goes most of the way to allowing easy commenting.

  3. jc says:
    19 March 2013 at 12:05

    I think it is true that given the nature of the internet and individuals it is inherently fragmented. For me, in regard to climate stuff this means that I basically only refer to WUWT for information since I assume that anything of substance will make an appearance, and occasionally visit others such as Bishop Hill or Climate Audit, but usually because there is reason to do so.
    The reason I am here now is because of a comment of your on WUWT, and your name being highlighted as a link. I don’t do that much, and I find, usually, that what I go to does not have as much content/comment as anticipated, which is a large part of your point.
    I suspect that ultimately this is dictated by the same realities that allow only a certain number of magazines on any given area to be viable. I think links from comments made could be more prominent, but I suspect that the “solution” lies in social networking sites being integrated more fully. Just as in “real” life.
    Personally, I would greatly appreciate a culture, rather than a technological capacity, which largely exists now, where when people want to pursue an issue they can “go off” to do so and then return.
    In reality, what you mention as an association of bloggers is already to an increasing degree happening at WUWT. Individual posters have access, some on a permanant and unrestricted basis. This is different to a site where the tone and direction is set by one person, and runs risks in the current format of having the core nature of the site altered by the contributions of one or two contributors, which is what I think is happening at WUWT.
    The thing is, as I think you are trying to address, it is very demanding to produce even one post per day per person that has distinctive and worthwhile elements created by that person. I suppose that would qualify someone as a full – time journalist, or rather by, contemporary standards, over-qualify them.
    So perhaps it does come down to site structure and design, or maybe site integration with other sites and social media.
    A challenge. But one well worth looking at in order to broaden both access by posters and flexibility for commentators.

  4. stefanthedenier says:
    26 April 2013 at 03:15

    Mike Haseler says: ”I’ve just checked and it is possible with a custom wordpress install to have a single domain with multiple wordpress blogs e.g. the domain “scepticsblogs.com” could host blogs scepticblogs.com/blog1 scepticblogs.com/blog2”
    Scotty, whatever you do, will get my support and blessing; apart of getting too lazy. your good idea should become reality.

  5. stefanthedenier says:
    26 April 2013 at 03:29

    jc says: ”I think it is true that given the nature of the internet and individuals it is inherently fragmented. For me, in regard to climate stuff this means that I basically only refer to WUWT for information since I assume that anything of substance will make an appearance”
    That’s, if you cannot detect that: real proofs are not in Anthony Whats’ interest. real proofs that can bring ”the end result” = would make Anthony a ”yesterday’s news” Therefore, him constantly publicizing what the leading Warmist say, then being satirical about them, is a common practice of many other blogs also.
    Mike should make a blog, where NEW / ORIGINAL ideas are presented, not just parroting what Mann. Hansen said, or didn’t say. Because: those two and similar should be in jail, not to be dignified instead.

  6. Scottish Sceptic says:
    26 April 2013 at 08:24

    It is an interesting question: “does Anthony Watts really want to end the scam?” Logically he would be nothing without it. Or perhaps not, perhaps this is only the first of many possible avenues for such a talented person.
    I would have said that people like Mann don’t matter because no one listens to them. Until I got a note back from what I can only believe is one of the leading climate “scientists” in Scotland accusing me on not following the physics.
    This is palpably false as I am constantly asking for climate “scientists” to stick to the physics and not falsely make out their hypothetical and untested ideas as having any scientific credibility.
    But then I realised that this guy doesn’t get out much. He probably doesn’t have a big social circle beyond his students and the likes of Mann. And he clearly doesn’t read the material written by sceptics – or even bother to talk – or even listen and remember what I told him last time we spoke.
    Selected deafness – group-think. In other words, we need people like Anthony Watts to continually drive home the message, because the day they stop, the group-think climate “scientists” will be able once again to portray themselves as being “science”, when the only people who are really interested in the science** are the kinds of sceptics who read Anthony’s blog
    **Impartial, unbiased, giving all sides, based on evidence, open, fair, public debate about the evidence. NOT groupthink by academics behind closed doors imagining un-science in everyone who disagrees with them.

Comments are closed.