Um, I do like my new category of “climate snarking”, since it allows me to offend people but get away with it because I’m being ironic. Or something. Anyway: Natures Climate Feedback blog has undergone a quiet revamp. Perhaps they have been listening to Eli? Unlikely I know – no one else does (remember, this is ironic). Anyway, I *still* wish them well, and clearly they have been listening to feedback, and they still have the good taste to include me on their blogroll, but despite that I’m still going to criticise them for silently revising their list of “core contributors”, from the original: John VanDecar, Jo Thorpe, Patricia Romero Lankao, Michael Oppenheimer, Kevin Vranes, Hans von Storch, Heike Langenberg, Olive Heffernan, Oliver Morton and Roger Pielke, Jr. to the current: Hans von Storch, Heike Langenberg, Olive Heffernan, Oliver Morton, Paty Romero Lankao and Roger Pielke, Jr (get your copy of the original list from http://blogs.nature.com/climatefeedback/core_contributors/ before it gets updated…). What I’m criticising, BTW, is the silence rather than the revision – in the absence of an explanation rumours are bound to swirl.
That means (apart from Nature folk) the only climate scientist they have is von S. Who is without doubt a top-notch climate scientist. But whose recent posting there did its best to associate him with the Dark Side.
My suggestion is that they get someone good (von S?) to do a nice posting on “how attribution of climate change is actually done” ‘cos I don’t think there is any good public-type explanation of this (you can of course fight your way through the IPCC version but thats hard going).
[Update: a note that Nature has a post on "teething troubles" -W]