Climate Science Glossary

Term Lookup

Enter a term in the search box to find its definition.

Settings

Use the controls in the far right panel to increase or decrease the number of terms automatically displayed (or to completely turn that feature off).

Term Lookup

Settings


All IPCC definitions taken from Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis. Working Group I Contribution to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Annex I, Glossary, pp. 941-954. Cambridge University Press.

Home Arguments Software Resources Comments The Consensus Project Translations About Donate

Twitter Facebook YouTube Pinterest

RSS Posts RSS Comments Email Subscribe


Climate's changed before
It's the sun
It's not bad
There is no consensus
It's cooling
Models are unreliable
Temp record is unreliable
Animals and plants can adapt
It hasn't warmed since 1998
Antarctica is gaining ice
View All Arguments...



Username
Password
Keep me logged in
New? Register here
Forgot your password?

Latest Posts

Archives

Vote for SkS in the physics.org web awards

Posted on 23 October 2010 by John Cook

Skeptical Science is honoured to be included in the short list of the Institute of Physics Web Awards 2010. Each year, the Institute of Physics select 35 websites in 7 different categories, including Best Blog, Best News Site, Best Podcast, etc. Skeptical Science is listed in the President's Prize category (which seems to be the miscellaneous websites that can't be categorised elsewhere).

Voting ends November 7 and on November 15, they announce a People's Choice plus the judge's choice. So be sure to register with physics.org (as only registered users can take part) and vote for Skeptical Science. Actually, you can vote/rate all the websites so have a look at some of the other websites - Sixty Symbols is pretty cool (what's that, I'm not supposed to mention the competition?)

0 0

Bookmark and Share Printable Version  |  Link to this page

Comments

Comments 1 to 14:

  1. Done John, I think - what a clumsy voting system! Good luck.
    0 0
  2. I think I voted too. Very odd.
    0 0
  3. The physicist's take on voting? Obviously it must be the best...

    A pretty nice selection of websites, many of which I didn't know of; I can see a lot more time expended in my future.
    0 0
  4. Might be worth clarifying how voting is supposed to work because for us unphysical types it may be puzzling.

    When you click on the link for your selected website from a given category, you'll be taken to that website, with a sort of toolbar shown at top. In the toolbar is a bargraph of little stars. Click on the star rating you want. You get to vote for more than one entry in a category, with what you think is the appropriate star rating for each site.

    Clear as mud, eh?
    0 0
  5. Well, it was easier than setting the clock on my VCR.
    0 0
  6. Somebody has thought hard how to make a voting system that is as awkward as possible. I voted SkS too, probably. I gave some stars to zooniverse too, as I have been there long time ago classifying some galaxies and lately I have digitized some old weather observations. I suggest that to everyone - this is your chance to do real climate science:

    http://www.zooniverse.org/home
    0 0
  7. I believe this nomination is nothing to do, directly, with the AGW/Anti-AGW debate or SkS position on it; except so far as this debate has forced a lot of people to communicate science in general and physics in particular, at a number of levels, with the general public. As a spin-off of this 'debate' sites like SkS have provided some stupendous explanations, digestible by anyone and everyone, whatever their perspective on AGW.
    SkS's 3 level explanations, appropriate use of graphs, equations, analogies etc. is clearly a great example of the communications of science with the general public - what ever your perspective on climate change.
    0 0
  8. Tenney Naumer...

    What's a VCR?
    :-)
    0 0
  9. Come on people, voting was not so difficult. :-)

    You do not vote a single website; you can give 1-5 'points' to any of the shortlisted websites for each group. You have the chance to visit the sites first before voting. Open new tabs for each website. When you do the rating for each website (selecting 1-5 stars), the system sends your vote to physics.org to get counted.
    0 0
  10. Not going to vote for John Cook. I could vote him, if he just would take in account all of the evidence, not just the ones that match to his preconceived notions. At this state, this site is only skeptical on skepticism, not much on anything else.
    0 0
  11. Come on 'protestant'. The physics.org website does not have any denier candidates shortlisted. Do you think this is just selection variability or that there is a scientific trend on physics.org?

    SkepticalScience does very well in the voting, and is head to head with Sixty Symbols.
    0 0
  12. Do you think, just possibly, "protestant" has missed the point of SkS? His proposition "take in account all of the evidence" seems to fly in the face of the whole web site which is devoted to examining all of the evidence AGAINST global warming. None of which, so far, stands up.
    0 0
  13. @protestant: Actually, it is the contrarian's arguments that require a lot of cherry-picking and ignore the overwhelming evidence supporting AGW theory.

    This site is about finding the truth. I encourage you to continue learning about the science and abandon your naive belief in the pseudo-science bandied about by contrarians.

    If you aren't interested in learning more about science, then I suggest you just go someplace else where your preconceived notions will be welcome, such as WUWT.
    0 0
  14. I think I voted as well - ta Doug#4

    And yes to Les#7
    0 0

You need to be logged in to post a comment. Login via the left margin or if you're new, register here.



The Consensus Project Website

TEXTBOOK

THE ESCALATOR

(free to republish)

THE DEBUNKING HANDBOOK

BOOK NOW AVAILABLE

The Scientific Guide to
Global Warming Skepticism

Smartphone Apps

iPhone
Android
Nokia

© Copyright 2014 John Cook
Home | Links | Translations | About Us | Contact Us