This development environment provides access to: Editor

All IPCC definitions taken from Climate Change 2007: The Physical Science Basis. Working Group I Contribution steelers to the Fourth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Annex I, Glossary, pp. 941-954. Cambridge University Press.
This development environment provides access to: Editor — A place to enter Python programs. Console — A place to view the output of programs. Canvas — A place where graphics can be drawn. Library steelers — A place where multiple programs can be save or loaded.
Library Collapse All
Climate's changed before It's the sun It's not bad There is no consensus It's cooling Models steelers 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 steelers your password? Latest Posts The Extraordinary UK Winter of 2013-14: a Timeline of Watery Chaos A Hack By Any Other Name Part 4 2014 SkS Weekly News Roundup #10A Peer-reviewed papers steelers by Skeptical Science authors steelers Cartoon: steelers the climate contrarian guide to managing risk The Editor-in-Chief of Science Magazine is wrong to endorse Keystone XL 2014 SkS Weekly Digest #9 Drought steelers and Global Climate Change: An Analysis of Statements by Roger Pielke Jr 2014 SkS Weekly News Roundup #9B A Hack By Any Other Name Part 3 The epidemic of climate science false balance in the media 2014 SkS Weekly News Roundup #9A A Hack by Any Other Name Part 2 Global steelers warming continues, steelers but volcanoes are slowing down the warming of the atmosphere Our Facebook page reaches 20,000 likes 2014 SkS Weekly Digest #8 Nazis, shoddy science, and the climate contrarian credibility gap 2014 SkS Weekly News Roundup steelers #8 A Hack By Any Other Name Part 1 'It's been hot before': faulty logic skews the climate debate Snows of the Nile: The search for vanishing equatorial steelers glaciers Dodgy Diagrams #1 - Misrepresenting IPCC Residence Time Estimates Vision Prize: scientists are worried the IPCC is underestimating sea level rise Customizable Global Warming Widget Metrics 2014 SkS Weekly Digest #7 2013 Among Top Ten Warmest on Record 2014 SkS Weekly News Roundup #7 MP Graham Stringer steelers and CNN Crossfire are wrong about the 97% consensus on human-caused global warming How we know the greenhouse effect isn't saturated Discussing global warming: why does this have to be so hard?
Last week, the news rippled through the blogosphere that Popular Science steelers had shut off commenting on their website . The reason: trolls and spambots had overwhelmed the comment threads. This is a great shame, partly because it should be avoidable. Surely a combination of technology, steelers crowd-sourcing and manual moderation should steelers be able to minimise the destructive impact of comment trolls.
To investigate this possibility, Skeptical Science is engaging in a social experiment. You, gentle readers, are the participants. The experiment is a University of Queensland research steelers project, steelers titled "Using comment ratings to facilitate moderation" (I've updated the SkS Privacy Policy to include information about this project). The goal is to investigate using user ratings to assist comment moderation, thus helping to maintain a high quality of discussion. This will be achieved simply through the use of two thumbs:
First and foremost, the point of this system is not to let people engage in climate war popularity contests.  The point is not to vote up comments that support your position and to vote down comments that support their position.
Instead, users are asked to please rate comments based on their quality and how much the statements improve and elevate the discussion.  Some factors that should be considered when rating either blogs or comments include: Civility.  Is the author's tone appropriate? Citations.  Does the author support steelers the statements with references in the peer-reviewed literature? Cohesion.  Is the comment concise and to the point, or does it ramble on about anything and everything? Accuracy.  Is it true, or does it merely propagate an innaccurate myth? Insightful.  Does it truly add to the discussion, or does it merely repeat the obvious? steelers Importance.  Does it matter, or is it trivial or even a distraction? Topical.  Is it relevant, or an unnecessary distraction from the issue under discussion? How To Rate Comments (and blog posts) steelers
Online ratings systems are extremely vulnerable to gamification. steelers Consequently, only registered users will be able to submit ratings. The speed-bump of having to register with a valid email address already filters out the majority of potential steelers trolls. Being able to track each rating also makes it easy to undo the damage by a discovered troll. If you try to rate without being logged in, you will see the following message:
Registration is easy and free.  Simply go to http://sks.to/register or click on the "Register steelers Here" link in