Permit me a moment to toot my own horn, if you will. It's for the greater good, anyway.
The annual Weblog Awards are here again. This year, as they had last year, there is a category for Best Science Blog. My own Bad Astronomy site is a finalist.
Last year, I had a lot of fun in a mock death race with Pharyngula, another science site (and one you should be reading!). I was going to be much more low key about this year's contest, but then things took an odd turn.
At least one antiscience site made the finalist list this year. Junk Science, run by Steve Milloy, is well known to be a neo-con site sponsored by Big Oil and Tobacco which comes to, um, suspect conclusions, to be polite.
Another finalist is Climate Audit, which is an anti-global warming site. The author, Steve McIntyre, claims the site is only trying to point out where bad statistics are used in the climate change arguments, but it's interesting that he seems to spend far more time attacking arguments supporting the reality of global warming, when it's well-known that arguments against its reality use far more bad science.
Then Climate Audit decided to say things about my site that were not true, and I decided I couldn't be low key anymore.
So here is where I shamelessly self-promote: please vote for Bad Astronomy -- assuming you read my blog and like it. While I do touch on politics, religion, and other topics, I try very hard to stay reality-based and promote real science and fight against those who would fold, spin, or mutilate it.
The award is really just a skewed popularity contest, and I understand that. But I think that, since the award if for best science site, a science site should win it. Please: go take a look at my blog, and take a look at Climate Audit. Compare them, and vote.
I'll note that HuffPo is up for Best Blog, too.