2010-11-18 16:04:19Poptech, Poptech, O' Where Art Thou
Daniel Bailey
Daniel Bailey
yooper49855@hotmail...
66.96.96.66

Sorry, guys, I finally had to try and step in to put the brakes on this guy in this thread.  If I overstepped, I'm sorry.  Relevant moderated comment below:

 -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- 

kdkd,

Then produce the evidence! Produce the research that Dr. Seitz oversaw or produced that questions the link between cancer and tobacco.

Either produce the research or concede on this point.

Edit
Moderator Response: Please limit the overuse of bold tags. Merely endlessly repeating the same point, in bold, constitutes yelling and does not further the conversation. Succinct use of tags serves to enhance dialogue, but detracts when overused.

 --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

John, if you agree with this action, it might help to add something similar to the comments policy.

The Yooper

 

2010-11-19 18:15:01Poppie
Albatross
Julian Brimelow
stomatalaperture@gmail...
68.149.183.203

Daniel and John,

This is not my web site, but I will humbly offer my opinion. 

As much as it pains me, IMHO, Poptech should be given a time-out, or needs to be given a stern warning-- if it were me I'd ban him, but I'm a grouch ;)  Poptech has quite the unpleasant reputation.  He even has gone so far as to post someone's personal details (home telephone, home address etc.) on the web (not me, a fellow by the name of Ian), because they got in a tiff over AGW-- in short, he does NOT play nice. I think that Tim Lambert has banned him from Deltoid b/c of his bad behavior there.

Poptech routinely misrepresents the science, and facts.  This is also the same person who has a list of 400 about papers which they claim refutes AGW-- Greenfyre and others have shown this to be very far from the truth, and when scientists have asked to have their papers removed from the list he has refused. 

Again, IMHO, SS deserves better.  Surely Poptech is free to go somewhere else if they want to?   This is, as far as I understand, first and foremost a science web site, and it is by far the most pleasant place on the web to discuss the science of climate change.  But the whenever Poptech arrives on the scene things go downhill fast. Perhaps one should be required to actually contribute to the science once in a while to be allowed to post...?

Playing whack-a-mole with him ad infinitum detracts from the science.

Anyhow, those are my thoughts.  Hope this has not come across as being too pushy. John, you are of course free to tell me to go and talk a walk...

2010-11-20 05:25:00
Ned

ned.flounders@yahoo...
129.170.23.58

He pretty much took over the first Oreskes thread, and was starting in on the new one.  I've waded through both threads with a machete, deleting comments left and right. I'm trying to be as fair and even-handed as possible. 

Somehow, Poptech's entrance into a discussion tends to degrade the quality of the entire thread -- it's not enough to just aggressively moderate his own comments; he tends to provoke others into posting stuff that also has to be deleted.

2010-11-20 11:17:58
kdkd
Kieren Diment
diment@gmail...
124.168.34.13
Yeah, if it was up to me, I'd ban him for a month or so, to see if that helped with his attitude, but I doubt it will.