Work in progress: 181,232 of 181,233 sites checked so far, more every week · updated 2 Nov 2026Missing a blog? Tell us

Top all-time · #25555

J

James' Empty Blog

Personal blog · julesandjames.blogspot.comscience

James' Empty Blog is a personal blog at julesandjames.blogspot.com about science. Since 2011, 3 different Hacker News readers have linked it 4 times. It is still writing: the last post was on 2024-11-15, and you can follow it by feed.

Visit the blog
4mentions?
3HN people?
2011–2020first – last linked?
Links on Hacker News per year · peak 2 in 2019

Too few sampled comments (3) to say how often HN recommends it.?

Why HN links it

Linked on HN for posts on COVID lockdown effects and climate warming projections. One commenter points to it as a saner assessment of warming risks, while another disputes its lockdown comparison.

Summarised by Claude from a sample of 3 HN comments that link here. Each comment is marked recommending, critical or neutral (citing without judging); how this works.

If I have seen further than others, it is by treading on the toes of giants

What Hacker News says?

  1. Comparing winter excess death peaks, where government interventions (like lockdowns) didn't occur, with COVID19 peaks doesn't tell you what would have happened without the interventions. You (I think) say the interventions caused the peaks (or maybe that they're no worse than winter flu peaks so govts shouldn't have intervened, you're not clear on your exact view). The experts say the interventions stopped the COVID…

    Comment linking /2020/07/mountains-and-molehills.html

    on “Coronavirus: Oxford vaccine triggers immune response”
  2. Submitted Reliability of the IPCC AR4 (CMIP3) ensemble as a story · 1 points

    HN discussion
  3. For a more sane assessment of issues like this, see http://julesandjames.blogspot.com/2019/01/blueskiesresearcho...

    Comment linking /2019/01/blueskiesresearchorguk-costs-of.html

    on “Met Office: global warming could exceed 1.5C within five years”
  4. But that is NOT the consensus view of climate scientists. The IPCC reports, for example, do NOT assign any non-negligible probability to the possibility of human extinction caused by climate change. They talk about bad effects, but nothing remotely close to that bad. For a recent example of a real climate scientist debunking a way overblown alarmist paper, of the sort that seems to prompt this sort of anguish, see t…

    Comment linking /2019/04/blueskiesresearchorguk-steffen-nonsense.html

    on “Facing Extinction by Catherine Ingram”

Search all of HN for julesandjames.blogspot.com