I’m off to San Francisco to the AGU meeting and to meetup with Steve McIntyre and others. So I won’t be posting for awhile.
I’ll have some new material over the weekend.
I’m off to San Francisco to the AGU meeting and to meetup with Steve McIntyre and others. So I won’t be posting for awhile.
I’ll have some new material over the weekend.
Anthony:
I’ll bet a poster session on “How Not To Measure Temperature” would have been a real hit at AGU. Even if you had to do it in the hotel lobby instead of at the conference itself.
Anthony ,
You be careful out there amongst the socialists. Hold on tight to your wallet. They love the taxes in that city, so you have to keep an eye out.
After many false starts, I have finally drummed up a debate on climate change which will be broadcast on Blogtalkradio.com between Dr. Andrew Dessler of Texas A&M on the non questioning pro side, and my hero Dr. Timothy Ball, of the University of Winnipeg, on the sane/skeptical side.
The time will be 12:00 PM (Pacific) – High noon (how fitting).
The host will be Eric Berger of the Houston Chronicle.
You can call in a question or comment during the debate at (646) 378-1131.
Also I believe the link above supports text messaging, so you can send in a question or comment that way as well.
See Anthony, when I got started up on that climate change debate thing, I couldn’t stop. This is the result. I hope you and or your readers will tune in (or log in as the case maybe) to support Dr Ball.
Oops, forgot to say the debate will be on Monday, December 17th.
High Noon (Pacific time).
Also I think you have to be registered to comment on Blogtalkradio, so you might want to get that out of the way early.
The science is all on our side. The proposed mitigations coming from the alarmists are repellant. It’s hard to figure why the climate change became an issue in the first place. The supposed negative impacts of AGW always strike me as positives. Less cold during winter – heck I moved to California for that.
More rain – halleluya.
So why doesn’t our side of the argument get more traction with the politicians?
Maybe it’s because they don’t have enough time to read blogs.
Originally when I engaged a media type with some of the facts of AGW, gathered from this and other sites, he said he wanted me to appear on air to call the climatologists liars myself.
He didn’t dismiss my assertions, it’s just that he didn’t have the same amount of information that I have, so he wouldn’t go calling out climate science himself. It would have been in his interest to do so just for ratings sake, but it’s a complicated issue to grasp and communicate where and why the IPCC and climate science is in error. He doesn’t have the time or energy for it.
On Eric Berger’s blog he said, “I would love to have global warming proved a hoax, just because it would be a huge story.” This is why I engaged him in a chiding commentary which eventuated in his offering to host the climate debate.
Newsmen want to tell our side of it, we just have to get their attention. And then remember they can’t tell it for us, if we can’t tell it to them.