Real Climate confirms their lack of credibility in AGW debate

Russ Steele

Some of the regulars who comment here on the AGW issue often cited RealClimate.org as a reliable source of information on global warming.  I have refused to give RealClimate any credibility on this blog, based on my initial experience, which included deleting my comments and questions without comment. 

Now by their own admission in the Hadley CRU e-mail dump,  RealClimate.org authors admit screening and manipulating their site to muffle any scepticism:

From: “Michael E. Mann”
To: Tim Osborn, Keith Briffa
Subject: update
Date: Thu, 09 Feb 2006 16:51:53 -0500
Cc: Gavin Schmidt
guys, I see that Science has already gone online w/ the new issue, so we put up the RC post. By now, you’ve probably read that nasty McIntyre thing. Apparently, he violated the embargo on his website (I don’t go there personally, but so I’m informed).

Anyway, I wanted you guys to know that you’re free to use RC in any way you think would be helpful. Gavin and I are going to be careful about what comments we screen through, and we’ll be very careful to answer any questions that come up to any extent we can. On the other hand, you might want to visit the thread and post replies yourself. We can hold comments up in the queue and contact you about whether or not you think they should be screened through or not, and if so, any comments you’d like us to include.

You’re also welcome to do a followup guest post, etc. think of RC as a resource that is at your disposal to combat any disinformation put forward by the McIntyres of the world. Just let us know. We’ll use our best discretion to make sure the skeptics dont’get to use the RC comments as a megaphone…

This is not how science debate is done. This is how AGW proponents tried to control the debate through conspiratorial manipulation.  Now you know!