“Never be cruel and never be cowardly, and never ever eat pears”

Lmao Gernot I saw this literally 2 minutes after you left. No pictures of me with horns were attached!

Sometimes I go into my Facebook “tags” tab:

Biblically accurate F35

So no, I really don’t find the bot distasteful or anything like it. I liked it! Colin sometimes just lets me shitpost under his tweets.

I think you can’t find a single piece of my work not acknowledging the need for CDR (tho I do take some issues with the point in the QT, which has a response from someone else saying it shows the bot is a shill for CDR companies. But my disagreement is different in nature).

I found out about the bot today and honestly it seemed pretty balanced/interesting so I followed it immediately. Since I see you were engaging with it I assume you don’t hate it either (maybe I’m wrong?). In any case, no, making some silly jokes is not the same as “casting stones”.

True that (very recently) there’s the moral finger wagging you mention/experienced. Also true that many of the people in the former camp I mention think that people in the second one are also covert promoters.

I think there’s a tension between thinking that by not discussing/researching it academically the issue will just go away (in that sense I think it won’t) vs thinking that only by openly/transparently researching it can we provide a useful counterpoint to people trying to sell/promote it.

Don’t want to start a fight, but to be honest, as someone who researches solar geo, the most (if only) bullying I’ve seen is from climate researchers who’ve been telling me for ages that I shouldn’t do it… independently of underlying reasons or outcomes (ie showing also the potential risks).

a gold robot says we 're doomed next to a r2d2 robot ALT: a gold robot says we 're doomed next to a r2d2 robot

C3P8.5

a gold robot says we 're doomed next to a r2d2 robot ALT: a gold robot says we 're doomed next to a r2d2 robot

C3P8.5

Becca the BECCS bot, Debbie the DAC doll, Ollie the OAE agent, Sam the SRM sleuth

Ok at least give me a AI bot that makes people mad about GWP metrics.

Should we have a… no of course not… but maybe…

Academia would be funnier if ORCID provided the option of a nickname that you could use on papers.
"As 1-800-LIQUIDITY et al. (2026) suggested..."

Imagine if you were spoon-fed Mac n Cheese on a cloud but it was made by angels, with the best cheese in the world and with grappa in it.

Can confirm. My dad used to make it in his restaurant once in a while... it's... something......

Nah I'd rather crank up the "make me look nice" option on Zoom up to 11 and refuse to use any other service.

Ah but you see my support of a politically motivated murder is different from the bad guys’ support of a politically motivated murder because my politics are unquestionably good.

I have a bad joke about the fact that what is “setting our planet on fire” is peak broadening of the CO₂ absorption lines through atmospheric collisions and not through polarization as the author claims, but I fear like 5 people would get it.

..and that,even in 2016, was around 1k w/ Wiley. But he thought it was worth it because otherwise, before doing that, sometimes his papers would not be sent to review in JGR/ACP. When I wrote my first one, I insisted on not having the editing service, and he said "if it gets rejected it's on you".

For groups not in English speaking countries, sometimes the diff between "natural-sounding" English or not can make the difference between a paper being sent to review or not, or affect the tone of a review. When I was doing my PhD in Italy, my adv used to pay a editing service before submission.

Oh I agree, sorry if I message implied otherwise re: what our role is. Still, a paper needs to have good grammar and syntax (because honestly, there's nothing more humiliating than having a reviewer point out "this person doesn't know how to write in English"). So someone/thing needs to do that.

Ie as an advisor, sometimes I find it hard to justify "Well no actually you should re-write your sentence this way, because it sounds weird". That's just something you pick up with time. I found Claude to be ok at pointing out some of my usually convoluted phrasing-something normally reviewers do ;)

Counter to your counter - if normally it is up to the advisor/reviewers to fix bad grammar/weird syntax, how is it different than using an LLM not for the initial writing, but for the checking/feedback? Being ESL,I think writing improves way more with reading (both technical and non-technical works)

Are you really a climate scientist if you haven't thought of your own alternative metric?

iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1...

Keeping with the theme of the week that seems to be arguing over GWP20 and GWP100, what better week to have our paper out where we say they're both kinda meh and we propose a new one? 😆 @hausfath.bsky.social

Happy to report the GWP chat yet again reached the "ah so you're ok if temperatures skyrocket and millions more people die" phase in under 48h.

Depends what kind of jerk. I make a point of citing people that I know don’t cite me on purpose to make the point that I, unlike them, am civilized. OTOH, I do go out of my not to cite my phd advisor work because he was a real real asshole and I know it annoys him greatly.