Is a blog by a PhD in dentistry who spews climate denialism in every post a science blog?...A blog post may debunk a claim from a creationist, or anti-vax or GW-denialist blog, linking to it and quoting from it. If science blogs are preserved, but anti-science blogs are not, there will be link rot right there, preserving reactions without the context of the reactions. So perhaps all those antiscience and pseudoscience blogs should also be preserved – they may be bad science, but they are an important aspect of today’s society and will be interesting to future historians. In which case, how does one label them? They are clearly not science blogs (although some of them pretend to be), so they should not be just thrown into the same bag. Which is why this delineation between “real” science blogs and other stuff has to be made.
Sunday, July 15, 2012
Warmist "Scientific" American Blog Editor Bora Zivkovic writes a lengthy history of science blogs; forgets to mention award-winning Watts Up With That
Science Blogs – definition, and a history | A Blog Around The Clock, Scientific American Blog Network