Wednesday
Jul242013
by 
Bishop Hill
Bishop Hill Pulled
Jul 24, 2013 I've pulled a story I had up briefly. On reflection, it needed more confirmation before posting.
Jul 24, 2013 
Buy
Books
Click images for more details
Currently discussing
-
Nov 19 - Barbie Jacket
on
Need an economic adviser? Here are 5 ideas for finding the very best one -
Nov 11 - US Design Hub
on
Launched my very own online store.
Links
A few sites I've stumbled across recently....
-
Science blogs
-
Political blogs
-
Other blogs
Subscribe
Copyright © 2006-2013, Bishop Hill All rights reserved.
Reader Comments (11)
indeed
I read it before you pulled it. I could believe it if the University of Western Australia Psychology department was involved. But from the land of James Clerk Maxwell; hopefully not.
I need to read it. Someone mail it to me :).
mistakes happen , its admitting to them and learning from them is marks out the difference between AGW sceptics and AGW proponents. For them it impossible to admit to any error in their ‘perfect faith ‘ or settled science no matter how small , while ever word their prophets spout is treated like it comes straight from god , no matter how mad . The irony is that although they think this is a strength, its actual a weakness of ‘the cause ‘ for its an anti-science approach which is seen by the public for the BS it is.
Seeing Robinson's reaction I think a nice distinction arises:
1. There are climate blog intensives, for whom more and more detail is never a problem.
2. And journeymen, like myself. There's a story I don't need to read? What a relief.
Thank you by the way for the filter we call Bishop Hill. So glad I missed it.
It was a very amusing story! But definitely wise to get more confirmation.
The story may indeed turn out to be true but, as I posted on the pulled article, unless/until such things are verifiable it's best to treat stories like this as urban myths. In truth it is a sad reflection on the greener hues that our experience is that this kind of thing is well within their capability.
What is it? I totally missed it.
Shub it was a story about some alleged goings on at the University of Edinburgh from a correspondent to Andrew. If true it was a spat between 2 departments at a university which can't be that unusual.
And here's me thinking it was a reference to the Bish's social life!
Damn, I missed something.