Misplaced Pages

Bishop Hill (blog): Difference between revisions

Article snapshot taken from Wikipedia with creative commons attribution-sharealike license. Give it a read and then ask your questions in the chat. We can research this topic together.
Browse history interactively← Previous editNext edit →Content deleted Content addedVisualWikitext
Revision as of 21:05, 14 September 2010 editNsaa (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers29,851 edits See my comments. Added new stuff. Keep off! Undid revision 384840615 by William M. Connolley (talk)← Previous edit Revision as of 21:11, 14 September 2010 edit undoWilliam M. Connolley (talk | contribs)Autopatrolled, Extended confirmed users, Pending changes reviewers, Rollbackers66,011 edits rv: please discuss first. And please avoid obviously inappropriate edit commentsNext edit →
Line 1: Line 1:
#REDIRECT ] {{R from merge}}
{{Infobox website
| name =
| logo = ]
| screenshot =
| collapsible =
| collapsetext =
| caption =
| url =
| alexa =
| commercial =
| type = ]
| language =
| registration =
| owner =
| author = ]
| launch date = November 21, 2006
| current status =
| revenue =
| slogan = A dissentient afflicted with the malady of thought
| content license =
}}

'''Bishop Hill''' is a ] operated by ], a British ] and author of '']'' (2010).<ref name="Ridley_2010-02-03_Spectator" /> The blog first became prominent as a political blog.<ref name="Iain Dale">{{cite book|last=Dale|first=Iain|title=Iain Dale's Guide to Political Blogging in the UK|publisher=Harriman House Publishing|isbn=978-1905641628|page=269}}</ref>

The blog has come to public attention several times in connection with the global warming debate. In November 2009, ] wrote in a ''Daily Telegraph'' blog that Bishop Hill had reported the funding of the ] charity&mdash;to the tune of £700,000 over two years&mdash;by the British ].<ref>Delingpole, James. , a ''Daily Telegraph'' blog, 29 November 2009.</ref>
In February 2010, the ''Daily Mail'' reported that Paul Dennis, a British climate scientist, had posted an account on Montford's blog of Dennis's interview with police concerning their investigation into the ] in November 2009 from the University of East Anglia's ].<ref>''Daily Mail''. "", 5 February 2010. The ''Daily Mail'' writes: "It is understood Mr Dennis has been instructed not to talk to the media, but he posted his account of the interview on a British website run by climate change sceptic Andrew Montford."</ref>

Also in February 2010, ], the editor-in-chief of '']'', resigned from the Independent Climate Change Email Review&mdash;hours after the panel was launched to review the release of the emails&mdash;after Bishop Hill and Britain's ] publicised an interview Campbell had given in 2009 to China Radio International, in which he said there was no evidence of a coverup.<ref>Batty, David and Adam, David. , ''The Guardian'', 12 February 2010.</ref> The interview was posted on the Bishop Hill blog. Channel 4 News reported: "The interview, posted on the Bishop Hill blog, run by climate sceptic Andrew Montford, will come as an embarrassment to the enquiry's chair Sir Muir Russell".<ref>Clarke, Tom. , Channel 4 News, 11 February 2010.</ref>

] in ] describe the revelations the blog has done as "landed some good blows" talking about "CRU scientists did back-door deals to include unpublished research in the last IPCC report" among others. <ref name="Pearce_2010-09-14_Guardian" />

==References==
{{Reflist|2|refs=

<!-- Order refs by Author, Published, Publisher -->

<ref name="Pearce_2010-09-14_Guardian">{{cite web
| url = http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2010/sep/14/climategate-inquiries-lawson-report
| title = 'Climategate' inquiries were 'highly defective', report for sceptic thinktank rules
| last = Pearce
| first = Fred
| authorlink = Fred Pearce
| work = ]
| publisher = ]
| date = 2010-09-14
| accessdate = 2010-09-14
| archiveurl = http://www.webcitation.org/5sk9r67AO
| archivedate = 2010-09-14
| quote = I have no problem with Montford. His is not to everyone's taste, but he has landed some good blows here. Mainstream climate scientists need acerbic critics to keep them honest. And there are real signs of progress.
}}</ref>

<ref name="Ridley_2010-02-03_Spectator">], Matt. "", ''The Spectator'', 3 February 2010.</ref>

}}

==External links==
{{refbegin}}
*
{{refend}}

]
]
]
]
]

Revision as of 21:11, 14 September 2010

Redirect to:

  • From a merge: This is a redirect from a page that was merged into another page. This redirect was kept in order to preserve the edit history of this page after its content was merged into the content of the target page. Please do not remove the tag that generates this text (unless the need to recreate content on this page has been demonstrated) or delete this page.