No doubt, a lot of talk is buzzing about the IPCC and its statements. But how exactly do these documents come to be? I have an excellent article on this at Terry, written by Sarah Burch. Check it out. It's called:
Listen, I don't mean to be rude or anything but (to me at least) you seem to be using this blog more to feature Terry and SCQ. Obviously you can link to them but to tell us about every story that is being published over there...!
oh come on, Khalil, that's a bit off-putting: how do you define what a blog is for? how do you prescribe what links are valid? the SCQ is a major node for science talk, and the work there is of course intimately related to the interests Dave and I have, so much so that it's his site. PZ posts the same diatribe against religion in most of his posts, but we don't complain that he's basically just linking to his prior diatribe or reiterating it. At least with the SCQ posts, we get some breadth. I'm fond of them. Keep 'em coming.
Sorry you disapprove, but I'm honestly amazed at some of the material that these sites are privileged to showcase. Just wanted to let others see as well. This one for instance is good. We're all going to hear a lot about the IPCC report for a while, and yet, what exactly is the IPCC? That info is not as commonly referred to - at least not in detail. This piece does a good job of going over that.
And in truth, these types of posts are pretty easy for me to write about, since I'm involved in the process of them being published (hence the links often having some commentary).
Anyway, thanks for your editorial stance, but I guess, you see, the point is that those stances ultimately sit with myself and Ben. Isn't that the point of blogging after all?
David and Ben,
Yeah, I suppose that's what blogging is all about, I think. Ah well, it's a great blog in any case so...
Listen, I don't mean to be rude or anything but (to me at least) you seem to be using this blog more to feature Terry and SCQ. Obviously you can link to them but to tell us about every story that is being published over there...!
oh come on, Khalil, that's a bit off-putting: how do you define what a blog is for? how do you prescribe what links are valid? the SCQ is a major node for science talk, and the work there is of course intimately related to the interests Dave and I have, so much so that it's his site. PZ posts the same diatribe against religion in most of his posts, but we don't complain that he's basically just linking to his prior diatribe or reiterating it. At least with the SCQ posts, we get some breadth. I'm fond of them. Keep 'em coming.
Sorry you disapprove, but I'm honestly amazed at some of the material that these sites are privileged to showcase. Just wanted to let others see as well. This one for instance is good. We're all going to hear a lot about the IPCC report for a while, and yet, what exactly is the IPCC? That info is not as commonly referred to - at least not in detail. This piece does a good job of going over that.
And in truth, these types of posts are pretty easy for me to write about, since I'm involved in the process of them being published (hence the links often having some commentary).
Anyway, thanks for your editorial stance, but I guess, you see, the point is that those stances ultimately sit with myself and Ben. Isn't that the point of blogging after all?
David and Ben,
Yeah, I suppose that's what blogging is all about, I think. Ah well, it's a great blog in any case so...