Talk:RealClimate

message: I propose,  in the interests of fairness that the phrase: "The forum is moderated, and is restricted to scientific topics to avoid discussion of political or economic implications of the science." be changed to 
"The forum is moderated by proponents of the global warming by anthropogenic greenhouse gas theory, and is claimed by its authors to be restricted to scientific topics to avoid discussion of political or economic implications of the science."
My propsoed changes make this partisan statement a neutral statement and will undoubtably upset the partisan authors,  but will make this wikopedia topic far more accurate.  
The phrase as originally presented is identical to the position of the authors of there own website and is identical to their own; it's as if history makers were writing their own histories.
  
I had been a contributor to this forum and found my comments often deleted as "unscientific" while cheerleaders for extremely partisan and often scurrilous attacks on scientists who generally are unsupportive of the authors goals were able to withstand any further scrutiny whatsover.   In my opinion,  as well as that of many others who have given up on this site, the claim is unsubtantiated that this is, first and foremost, a scientific forum.    
Bruce Frykman (talk) 15:48, 28 December 2013 (UTC)
replies: text: Not done: please establish a consensus for this alteration before using the  template.— Carnivorous Bunny (talk) 03:54, 6 January 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Semi-protected edit request on 28 December 2013 

message: If the site has been taken down, a lot of articles need to be updated with archived versions (iff available) 771 links to articles and discussion treads. Nsaa (talk) 16:42, 22 November 2015 (UTC)
replies: text: Wot rot! Eric Steig helpfully advises; "RealClimate is down! Will be fixed.  But meanwhile, please refer to http://realclimate-backup.org " . . dave souza, talk 18:57, 22 November 2015 (UTC)

text: No! don't refer to http://realclimate-backup.org - that site still has .js and CSS references to realclimate.org and it appears that making any access to a page beyond the topmost page triggers JavaScript that takes you to some random page in the web.  Folks on WUWT are reporting that many of them include malware.  I think realclimate-backup.org should be shutdown until people purge it of references to realclimate.org, which ought to be done anyway if it's supposed to be a good backup.  -Ric Werme  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 73.219.4.25 (talk) 05:47, 23 November 2015 (UTC)
replies: text:  I was refereing to the available third parties like Archive.org, Webcitation.org, archive.is etc. This should be done either way in all inline citations either way, I suppose, by using archiveurl, archivedate in the  template.  Nsaa (talk) 06:43, 23 November 2015 (UTC)

text: Progress already: https://realclimate.org is live, links go to realclimate-backup.org for the mo. . . . dave souza, talk 16:39, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  Link option 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified  on RealClimate. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.realclimate.org/index.php/archives/category/extras/contributor-bios/
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 18:44, 5 May 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified