TMC is an independent, primarily volunteer organization that relies on ad revenue to cover its operating costs. Please consider whitelisting TMC on your ad blocker or making a Paypal contribution here: paypal.me/SupportTMC

Global Warming thread organization

Discussion in 'Energy, Environment, and Policy' started by Robert.Boston, Oct 20, 2014.

?

Should the Climate Change / Global Warming thread be split

Poll closed Oct 30, 2014.
  1. Yes, split the thread

    20.0%
  2. No, keep the thread as is

    80.0%
  1. Robert.Boston

    Robert.Boston Model S VIN P01536

    Joined:
    Oct 7, 2011
    Messages:
    7,842
    Location:
    Portland, Maine, USA
    The Global Warming/Climate change thread is busy and long. Is it best left as is, allowing a fluid exchange of ideas and comments within a fairly large "sandbox", or should I split it?

    I've been toying around with different ideas of how to split it, if that's what people think would be most useful. Example:

    1. Climate change science news
    2. Climate change policy and politics
    3. Climate change skeptics

    Whether you are in favor of a split or not, please feel free to suggest how best to slice/dice. If I were to slice the thread up, I'd close the existing meta-thread.
     
  2. Raffy.Roma

    Raffy.Roma Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2012
    Messages:
    3,209
    Location:
    Rome (Italy)
    Robert I voted yes, but IMO best thing would be to split the thread in two threads like points 1 and 2 that you mentioned and to rename the thread "Free speech and Skepticism on Climate Change" like point 3 that you mentioned.
     
  3. ggies07

    ggies07 Active Member

    Joined:
    Nov 8, 2012
    Messages:
    2,263
    Location:
    Ft. Worth, TX
    I voted no. I get wanting to organize it a little more, but right now, I know I can go one place for all kinds of info on this subject. If it's split, that's even more threads to keep up with.
     
  4. tigerade

    tigerade Member

    Joined:
    May 14, 2013
    Messages:
    674
    Location:
    Georgia
    I don't think there is a point of splitting it. If it was split, those outside the usual group (Me, Raffy, RichardC, ggies, Robert Boston) would likely not adhere to the rules. (Keeping politics out of science thread). The problem is that there are some who think that their personal opinion is just as good as decades of research and measurement. I'm perfectly fine with someone coming in and laying down an ignorance bomb to our usual discussion, it's the intellectual version of a turkey shoot. I rarely see a well-reasoned and evidence based argument from them and I actually think debunking bad arguments adds value to the discussion.
     
  5. GSP

    GSP Member

    Joined:
    Dec 28, 2007
    Messages:
    1,999
    I agree with Tigerade. I also think it would be impossible to keep people on topic if split.

    GSP
     
  6. Raffy.Roma

    Raffy.Roma Active Member

    Joined:
    Jul 22, 2012
    Messages:
    3,209
    Location:
    Rome (Italy)
    Thank you Tiger, in fact as you know I always invited in the thread "Climate Change/Global Warming discussion" to keep politics out of it. But I have seen that this goal is very difficult to achieve. That's why I thought it was a good idea to have a thread on this matter concerning policy and politics. But I do agree with you.

    A science thread has to be kept out of politics.
     
  7. tigerade

    tigerade Member

    Joined:
    May 14, 2013
    Messages:
    674
    Location:
    Georgia
    It kind of reminds me of this clip.

    The Big Bang Theory - Evolution versus Creationism (funny) - YouTube

    Just change the word "evolution" to "anthropogenic climate change".
     

Share This Page