Comments on: Other August numbers are out

By: evanjones

evanjones — Mon, 08 Sep 2008 03:47:02 +0000

I can understand the ideas and commentary from the comments enough to give my professor a run for his money.

Hit ‘em with the oceanic-atmospheric multidecadal cycles (the “big six” PDO, AMO, NAO, IPO, AO, AAO), which flipped from cool to warm, one at a time, from 1977 – 2001. (And, guess what, the temperatures rose a little bit.) You know the global temperature story since then.

And now the PDO is gone cold (with the AO and NAO showing signs of following, both ahead of expected schedule).

Those cycles hadn’t even been discovered by science until ten years after Hansen’s infamous 1998 speech. (One wonders if the AGW movement would have had the same political buckshot if they had.

By: Jeff Alberts

Jeff Alberts — Fri, 05 Sep 2008 16:36:37 +0000

I get RSS feeds for both WUWT and CA. I hadn’t read for a few days, and CA had about 250 unread posts, WUWT had over 650….

By: Frank Davis

Frank Davis — Fri, 05 Sep 2008 02:08:09 +0000

This is a graph showing global warming, right? So just how many “views” are there in a degree Celsius?

By: Ray Reynolds

Ray Reynolds — Thu, 04 Sep 2008 19:47:08 +0000

Not only does WUWT offer up informative articles but the comment dialog is polite and manages to be entertaining and interesting too.

Thanks to everyone! Er, perhaps especially those ogres with the ax, whacking trolls.

By: David Gladstone

David Gladstone — Thu, 04 Sep 2008 17:19:54 +0000

I’m an atheist, but I thank the gods that someone is doing this work! :]

By: Paul

Paul — Thu, 04 Sep 2008 17:14:19 +0000

Anthony,
Do you realise that yours is now THE MOST POPULAR CLIMATE BLOG?!
Go to alexa.com and you can compare, and see that realclimate is in decline (hoorah!), climateaudit is rising (good) but you are the top, see image at
http://globalwarmingquestions.googlepages.com/alexa.jpeg

REPLY: Well that’s a big claim, and it may or may not be true. There are lots of others not listed. such as the AccuWeather or the Weather Underground blogs, which may have higher numbers, then there’s the blogs like DeSmog and Grist and NYT’s Dot Earth which must surely have higher numbers. I haven’t looked, but while I thank you for the kudos, I don’t think the claim can be made without looking at broader data. – Anthony

By: bucko36

bucko36 — Thu, 04 Sep 2008 17:11:42 +0000

To add to “all the above” well deserved comments:
Anthony, thanks for the time and effort that you, and those helping you, do in maintaining this “GREAT” and informitive site.

By: Ric Werme

Ric Werme — Thu, 04 Sep 2008 17:06:08 +0000

Gee, I don’t know, that’s two months in a row where the readership increase has been declining (i.e. negative 2nd derivative). Fortunately no one here would ever remark over a single month’s or even two or three months’ data. :-)

When the NH is freezing its collective butts off this winter and it’s too cold to go outside skiing, I expect there will be some impressive readership numbers here. The posts about sunspots will still have small numbers inside them, though.

By: Patrick Powell

Patrick Powell — Thu, 04 Sep 2008 16:13:41 +0000

Quality stories and good discussion go a long way! Congrats Anthony!

By: Des

Des — Thu, 04 Sep 2008 15:57:55 +0000

Keep up the good work.

By: Eric Meyers

Eric Meyers — Thu, 04 Sep 2008 14:54:38 +0000

I’m a college freshman who was introduced to your blog by a friend, I’ve become a daily reader and I thank you for your daily updates! I can’t say I understand all the technical advanced statistics but I can understand the ideas and commentary from the comments enough to give my professor a run for his money. Thanks! I hold my breath every month for those temp data releases and I’ve learned to question things such as the widely popularized GISS and other facets of half truths that are presented to us as propaganda. I am a converted AGW believer, but only because back in school when they taught us about global warming I was much less inclined to argue and seek truth than I am now.

By: Robert Wood

Robert Wood — Thu, 04 Sep 2008 14:31:03 +0000

Phil Bratby, I’ve just stopped buying the New Scientist and have e-mailed them several times why – their AGW editorial stance. They are a disgrace.

By: Robert Wood

Robert Wood — Thu, 04 Sep 2008 14:29:47 +0000

It’s global web runnaway. When the tipping point is reached, every single web view will be to WUWT. It will be catastrophic.

By: Retired Engineer

Retired Engineer — Thu, 04 Sep 2008 14:29:00 +0000

I don’t know if we can credit WUWT for the following story, but (whether he admits it or not) Anthony has raised the awareness on many climate issues.

http://news.yahoo.com/story/time/20080904/us_time/whydisastersaregettingworse;_ylt=Ai3XfW59ALwrwo79KAsPozms0NUE

I was quite astonished to read it, considering the source.
Rev., you have done us a great service. Thanks.

By: John Starr

John Starr — Thu, 04 Sep 2008 13:50:44 +0000

I’ve only been visiting a few weeks, but I enjoy the site. I haven’t posted because there is quite a bit to read and quite a lot to digest. But it is interesting and mentally-stimulating reading. Thank you for your efforts.