New moderated env sci forum

And the forum is: Go have a look. Why? From the welcome message:

We are creating a moderated newsgroup/mailing list for the discussion of environmental science, economics, policy and politics, especially as related to global change issues such as climate change, biodiversity,
and sustainability.

The signal to noise ratio on sci.environment and similar unmoderated discussion lists has dropped to the point where it can no longer sustain interesting or informative exchanges of information and ideas.

The success of the lightly moderated discussions on the blog has revealed that the hunger for serious and informed discussion remains. However, blogs do not fully replicate the broad-ranging
conversational style that usenet once supported even in controversy-prone areas of interest.

And so on. mt gets the credit for actually getting this up and running. Over the past few months I've pretty well abandoned sci.env. Too much junk, too many trolls, too many otherwise sensible people responding to trolls.

Hopefully the new forum will work. JA always encourages people to comment on his blog at sci.env rather than in the post comments, and I agree with that in part, though of course *now* I encourage you to use the new forum.


More like this

There's a thread on twitter, started by "@JacquelynGill" noting "The Day After Tomorrow", "@ClimateOfGavin" replying that "it was that movie and lame sci community response that prompted me to start blogging", and continuing "Spring 2004 was pre-RC, Scienceblogs, etc. Deltoid was around, Stoat, @…
In Memoriam, John McCarthy. Eeee, those were the days. [Late update: I've just gone through and re-read that P3 post. To anyone who knows my style and mt's, its pretty obvious who wrote which bits. But anyway, I've found my original email so this was my version: An appreciation of John McCarthy…
The science machine continues to churn out depressing reports. The high-latitude permafrost contains more carbon than originally thought. The Arctic Ocean ice is even thinner than we feared. But my thoughts are dominated by the issues raised by Chris Mooney and Sheril Kirshenbaum in their new book…
This is my site, and one of the facilities I provide is a signal to noise ratio. You want unmoderated discussion? Go and drown in usenet, which I abandoned years ago. In other words, I reserve the right to trim or delete junk [*]. Naturally, since they are your words, you will not see them as junk…

David Attenborough again lends his name & credibility to the proof of man's contribution to Climate Change.

Receeding Glaciers, melting icecaps, in the Artic & Greenland, and the effects on polar bear populations, from the absence of seals in their diet.
Yesterday's program also had interesting insights into the supercomputer, data (and ice) collection in, Denver?

Whilst he explained how through the Ages, over longer periods, there has been Climate Change, showing present day New York first as on the shores of the Artic Region, and next six foot under water - aaah the magic of cinematography in the digital era -
he presented 'evidence' that there has been Climate Change, and emphasizes that there is Global warming on a shorter time frame from human activity, ie: CO2 emissions.