tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post9034222099732959339..comments2024-02-12T15:25:44.028+11:00Comments on HotWhopper: How influential deniers flock to their echo chamber (and stay there)Souhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/08818999735123752034noreply@blogger.comBlogger13125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-31345462673008722902015-05-28T15:18:31.774+10:002015-05-28T15:18:31.774+10:00Yes it was ironic WUWT posting an article about ec...Yes it was ironic WUWT posting an article about echo chambers.<br /><br />The problem with WUWT is the articles can be so bad they are not debatable - check out Lord Monckton's Gish Gallops for example.<br /><br />Or even the moderators calling people Nazis - it's offputing.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11552461190113661645noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-73707941189013781622015-05-28T03:23:58.596+10:002015-05-28T03:23:58.596+10:00Thanks Anon. That's it.
(I tried that link th...Thanks Anon. That's it.<br /><br />(I tried that link the other day and it didn't work. I just tried it again and it still didn't work. Then I tried it in Internet Explorer and it works.<br /><br />Gripe - I wish more people would test their web pages in different browsers (I have more people using Firefox and Chrome - about 1/3 each. Only 8% use Internet Explorer - it's dropped a lot.). The interactive Arctic sea ice page of NSIDC only works in IE, too. Not in Chrome :(Souhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08818999735123752034noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-83134253696936585132015-05-28T03:02:53.236+10:002015-05-28T03:02:53.236+10:00I believe this is the new webpage:
https://ads.ni...I believe this is the new webpage:<br /><br />https://ads.nipr.ac.jp/vishop/vishop-extent.html?N<br /><br />But I'm not sure.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-67636690755667710052015-05-28T02:39:01.146+10:002015-05-28T02:39:01.146+10:00Link? (My link to JAXA isn't working)
It'...Link? (My link to JAXA isn't working)<br /><br />It's a bit early to write about the Arctic ice - normally. But I've noticed it's at record lows still.Souhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08818999735123752034noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-88805123225435133512015-05-28T01:42:18.837+10:002015-05-28T01:42:18.837+10:00Anyone see the latest JAXA??
Not pretty..Anyone see the latest JAXA??<br /><br />Not pretty..Flameisternoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-70173052526496018132015-05-28T00:08:56.370+10:002015-05-28T00:08:56.370+10:00I used to put some energy into posting at WUWT - b...I used to put some energy into posting at WUWT - but I've given it up as a Sisyphean task, shoveling information uphill while deniers roll it back down covered in nonsense, shouting insults. While hostile 'moderators' block sensible comments and permit the most atrocious personal attacks on anyone discussing real science or evidence. <br /><br />I just don't see the point - the majority of people posting on WUWT and other major denier blogs simply aren't interested in anything conflicting with their favored conspiracy theories. And quite frankly, undecided readers who stumble upon WUWT _should_ quickly conclude that it's nothing more than a box of nuts, based on the comments. KRnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-87418793517627953132015-05-27T23:07:13.642+10:002015-05-27T23:07:13.642+10:00Yeah, but I think Sou is wrong here because she wo...Yeah, but I think Sou is wrong here because she would be thinking in terms of the sceptic equivalent of RealClimate rather than the denier equivalent. Although both I and Sou could be both wrong because real scientists are sceptics anyway :)Millicentnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-23441114213877201242015-05-27T20:40:17.812+10:002015-05-27T20:40:17.812+10:00Surely, if there was such a thing, the denial equi...Surely, if there was such a thing, the denial equivalent of 'realclimate.org' would really struggle for material? <br /><br />That's watt gets me about this - there is no climate science that supports their arguments. John Russell (@JohnRussell40)https://twitter.com/JohnRussell40noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-41851967048974576392015-05-27T20:00:38.617+10:002015-05-27T20:00:38.617+10:00Tony, as you know, most pro-science people have be...Tony, as you know, most pro-science people have been banned from WUWT. And it's as futile to debate climate science with anyone at WUWT as it is to debate geology and biology with young earthers or near-spherical earth with flat-earthers. The best anyone can hope to do is inject a dose of reality into the madness (and be prepared to suffer the flames).<br /><br />Anthony, as you know, doesn't tolerate science. He's allergic to it. The people who comment there (and at Curry's place and other denier blogs) are mostly conspiracy nutters, with a sprinkling of disinformers, and the rare normal person who hasn't yet been banned. (Anthony keeps on a couple of normal people for his fans to bash). <br /><br />It's impossible to have any rational discussion with people who are behaving irrationally.<br /><br />Why would anyone bother with WUWT? It's not a science blog. It's nothing but a notice board where deniers can post their random "thoughts".<br /><br />(WUWT isn't just about denying climate science. Today Anthony's denying ozone chemistry.)Souhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08818999735123752034noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-32036601099037908602015-05-27T19:30:21.468+10:002015-05-27T19:30:21.468+10:00Sou's comment about echo chambers and Hot Whop...Sou's comment about echo chambers and Hot Whopper was interesting as whichever side of the debate you fall, there seems to be a tendency to gather like minded people around you which tends to stifle open debate. <br /><br />I saw this extract in the Sunday papers which, whilst referencing the recent UK general election, could be equally aimed at all those whose passionate beliefs can cause them to believe that everyone thinks like they do.<br /> <br /> <br />“Did they really not appreciate that other people felt differently from them and there was a chance the vote might not go their way? its an example of what psychologists call collective narcissism or the narcissistic mirror. . people surround themselves with others who reflect their own beliefs and world view. In doing so they come to believe their own little group speaks for all sensible reasonable people. Social media such as twitter are particularly adept at fostering collective narcissism. as its so easy to shut out the views of those you don’t agree with. when reality eventually intrudes, it can hurt.”<br /><br />Personally I regret the absence of those who challenge the echo. At one time people like Joel Shore, Scott Mandia and R Gates would regularly pop up to challenge beliefs at WUWT. That seems to be largely limited to Brandon these days. Without dissenters, debate tends to be sterile.<br /><br />tonyb<br />tonybhttp://climatereason.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-17268437660389308992015-05-27T11:29:31.537+10:002015-05-27T11:29:31.537+10:00For some reason my University's portal to the ...For some reason my University's portal to the Nature website is a bit buggy today, so I can't get a proper look at the paper, but it does seem consistent with the growing body of research about how online communities 'Balkanise' knowledge, self-selecting narrow streams of information. <br /><br />You might be interested in another recent study, Williams et al, which further supports this. They found that the vast majority of people involved in online discussions of climate change circulate within like-minded networks. Only rarely is there cross-communication, and that is usually interpreted as trolling. I guess nobody here will be too amazed to hear such observations!<br /><br />I think this kind of research explains both why the regular denizens of blog communities tend to be so sure 'we're right/they're wrong', and why blog communities are utterly unsuitable places to build up reliable scientific knowledge. It's all further evidence for why scientific research communities are the best places to do science.<br /><br />Williams et al:<br />http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0959378015000369Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15427410783634375334noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-66101762320579535272015-05-27T09:28:16.268+10:002015-05-27T09:28:16.268+10:00Ok, but does this really tell us something we didn...Ok, but does this really tell us something we didn't already know? It was already pretty clear that policy makers who oppose action on climate change were getting their info from echo chambers. This is clear from their associations. Really, they simply had to be, because they reject the science. To reinforce that, they will obviously seek out other people who also reject the science.<br /><br />The same mindset was evident during the last US presidential election, when conservative pundits were sure Romney would win easily, and kept telling each other that even though figures showed otherwise. When the actual results came in, they were genuinely shocked that reality was not dependent on their personal preferences.<br /><br />Rather than worrying about their obvious preference for echo chambers, wouldn't it be more relevant to wonder how it might be possible to increase political pressure on them?<br /><br />Closer to home, it's obvious by now, if you read the signs, that the current Australian, NZ (and Canadian) governments are intending to go to Paris with proposals that are effectively excuses for BAU. What's really needed is to find a way of making them think their political relevance depends on them going against some of their own ideology.Contrail Chooknoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2313427464944392482.post-84904805532447622372015-05-27T08:57:11.475+10:002015-05-27T08:57:11.475+10:00This is one of the reasons it is worth studying So...This is one of the reasons it is worth studying Social Network Analysis, for which some background in graph theory saves time.John Masheynoreply@blogger.com