Search HotWhopper


Comment Policy

Sou | 7:00 PM 9 Comments - leave a comment

When I was posting on HotCopper I made the effort to be polite and spent a lot of time researching and composing answers to questions people put about climate science and other topics including shares, with people often putting science questions directly to me by name (often in a rude and abusive fashion).  I am not constrained by the need to be so accommodating of bullies on this blog.  It's mine.

Feel free to post  a comment.  Posts that are generally polite and on topic are welcome.  I'll draw the line with abusive posts and persistent troll posts.

Steer clear of personal attacks, though you can throw pretty much what you like at me.  (Attack the argument, what people say and do.)

Avoid extreme language not acceptable in normal company, though there's a fair bit of leeway given here.

There is a strict "no violence" policy. That is, no talk of guns and no comments wishing physical harm on people. (That's a personal peeve of mine.)

There is also a strict 'no spam' policy.

I will not hesitate to delete comments that are overtly racist, sexist, libelous and/or use coarse language, and will treat people making such comments as permanently banned.  From now on, such comments will disappear with no comment from me and no record of them will remain on public display.  This is in the interest of visitors and people who make a positive contribution by way of comments.  For more info, click here. (Added by Sou 18 January 2014)

Don't post links to anti-science websites. If you think you need to link to a science disinformation or science denying website, try to resist the temptation.  If you can't resist, do not link directly.  Archive the web page first and then link to the archived version.  Here are two options:

If you can't find your comment where you thought it ought to be, try the HotWhoppery.  (If none of your comments appear or all of them disappear without trace, it's probably because you are one of four people who have been banned.)

(Finally, if you fear retribution from that site that merely pretends to like 'free speech', you can always post your comment under another name, using the Name/URL option - you can leave the URL line blank if you wish.)


  1. Do you have an email eddress?

    I'd like to repost your
    "Marcott et al - Must be the Heat!" article at my modest little site:
    citizenschallenge < > gmail. etc

  2. That's fine, Peter - check your gmail.

  3. Thank you Sou.
    Here's my introduction:
    ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

    WEDNESDAY, MARCH 27, 2013

    A closer look at McI/Watts' complaints re. Marcott et al - HotWhopper

    Over the past few weeks the internet's climate science denying echo-chamber has gone into over-time churring out one piece of opinion and vacuum chamber science after another. Unfortunately, it's another example of 'outcome focused' advocacy, rather than a serious dispassionate examination of the paper in question.

    The problem with this approach is that McIntyre/Watts' 'science' is science in a vacuum chamber. Unsurprisingly his 'reviewers' are his own audience, folks who desperately want to not accept what the science and Earth observations are telling us.

    And when actual scientists who understand this stuff point out errors, misconceptions and alteration of the facts ~ it get's written off... {or ridiculed to oblivion}... as part of the conspiracy.
    Is this anyway to approach geophysical facts and the future that is barreling down on us?
    ~ ~ ~

    In any event, Sou over at Hot has taken the time to put together an excellent critique of major flaws in the story-line the echo-chamber is putting out there, in their desperate struggle to discredit and out-scream the important lessons Marcott et al. 2013 has to offer.
    If you are interested the questions raised by McIntyre and Watts, you owe it to yourself to read through this examination.

    I thank Sou for her kind permission to copy and repost her article.

    1. dear whopper
      Green house gasses have been falling for a number of years see global relatve humidity trends on the web. Are you trying to say that a .038 percent increase of a minor greenhouse gas has the same effect as a 4% decease of the major greenhouse gas water vapor? Explain how that works.

    2. You've landed on the wrong page in more ways than one, Anonymous. Try posting to an article on the topic.

  4. citizenschallenge
    SATURDAY, MARCH 30, 2013

    Anthony, Watts Up With Those WUWT HotWhoppers? An Index

    Over the past few days I've been getting acquainted with the blog because it has done a good job of tracking Anthony Watts' increasingly irrational assault on the science of climatology. She's only been at it for a few months, but has produced many posts worth sharing.

    Since getting information out there to folks who are being lied to by the well oiled disinformation machine is my main goal ~ of which Anthony Watts is a leading light ~ I have compiled an index with short descriptive teaser quotes. For your reference as well as for sharing with others.

    Sou, at HotWhopper, I tip my hat to all the work you have put into your excellent blog.

  5. Hi, your hotlink to the HotWhoppery is misspelt, (no caps).

    1. Fixed, thanks KatyD. (Changed servers recently and these new ones are case sensitive.)

  6. Is there any scope for adding more 'recent comments' on the sidebar than just the five? It's how I navigate the site, by seeing which comments I've already viewed, and makes sure I don't miss nested ones....


Instead of commenting as "Anonymous", please comment using "Name/URL" and your name, initials or pseudonym or whatever. You can leave the "URL" box blank. This isn't mandatory. You can also sign in using your Google ID, Wordpress ID etc as indicated.

Click here to read the HotWhopper comment policy.