Big Lies from warmist John Cook: "attacks on SkS have not been about our scientific content...the unwillingness of deniers to engage with the scientific content is an implicit endorsement"

SkS: testimony to the potential of social media and the passion of volunteers

Our volunteers come from all over the world, with scientists, students, laypeople, engineers, illustrators making up our numbers.

"SkS-review" has become an immensely effective method of quality control, allowing SkS to maintain a high standard of scientific accuracy...also telling is that attacks on SkS have not been about our scientific content, but come in the form of conspiracy theories and the illegal hacking of our forum.
...
The fact that the attacks towards Skeptical Science consist of conspiracy theories and quote mining from stolen private correspondence testifies to the high quality content created by the SkS team and the success of the SkS forum internal review quality control system. Scientists explicitly endorse the level of quality of the content and the unwillingness of deniers to engage with the scientific content is an implicit endorsement.

Flashback: Bishop Hill blog - Cooking the books

Astonishingly, more than six months after having their errors pointed out to them, the denizens of Skeptical Science rewrote the article and then inserted comments suggesting that their commenters hadn't read the article properly.

I'm simply flabbergasted.

Flashback: Skepticalscience – Rewriting History « Shub Niggurath Climate

The recent censorship episode at the skepticalscience.com brings an often overlooked aspect to the forefront. The target of deletion Prof Roger Pielke Sr, runs a blog. The actions of Skepticalscience were revealed because he posted them there.

What if a scientist or a lay person, interacted with websites like Skepticalscience and did not have a blog?