WUWT-TV’s answer to Al Gore’s ‘Dirty Weather Report’ is ON THE AIR

Welcome, for the next 24 hours, WUWT will be bringing you the counterpoint to Al Gore’s claim that “dirty energy=dirty weather” which you can watch over here.

To watch WUWT-TV live see below:

You can watch live in the window above by pressing the PLAY icon, or you can click the link to USTREAM directly:  USTREAM direct link

Some notes:

1. I cannot remove the advertising, the cost to do this channel without it, given the potential number of viewer hours that could occur (along with overages) was too big of a financial risk for me. Please make do. perhaps we’ll get there for the next time, donations accepted.

2. In a few days, the source video clips will be posted on YouTube.

3. During live interviews, we will take selected questions submitted in comments below.

4. Please share this link to this post widely, on blogs, on facebook, with friends. Help get our view count up.

5. Press release on the event is here.

6. Schedule follows.

WUWT-TV Schedule November 14th & 15th

ALL TIMES BELOW are Pacific Standard Time but MAY CHANGE DURING THE LIVE BROADCAST if Presenters go short/long or we have technical difficulties.

To convert these times to your time zone, click to open this time zone converter tool.

For a mapped time zone (thx ‘aquix’) see: http://www.timezonecheck.com/

Recordings will be made available a few days after the broadcast.

Schedule:

Senator James Inhofe (recorded intro) 5:00 PST Nov 14 Intro – whats next?
Dr. Pat Michaels (live) 5:10 PST Nov 14 Lukewarmers, Hotheads & Flatliners
Bob Tisdale (video) 6PM PST Nov 14 Sea Surface Temperatures/ENSO
Chris Horner (live) 7PM PST Nov 14 Political angle, FOIA
Dr. Ryan Maue (live) 8PM PST Nov 14 Hurricanes
Steve Mosher & Tom Fuller (live) 9PM PST Nov 14 Climategate
Dr. David Evans (live) 10PM PST Nov 14 The Skeptics Case
Burt Rutan (recorded) 11PM PST Nov 14 Engineer’s perspective
Pete Garcia (movie intro, recorded) 12AM PST Nov 15 Feature movie
The Boy who Cried Warming (movie)
The Boy who Cried Warming (movie)
John Coleman, KUSI-TV (intro, recorded) 1:30AM PST Nov 15
John Coleman Special Pt1 (recorded) TV special on AGW Pt1
John Coleman Special Pt2 (recorded) 2:30AM PST Nov 15 TV special on AGW Pt2
Dr. Sebastian Lüning (recorded) 3:30AM PST Nov15 The Sun as Climate Driver
Mike Smith, CCM (recorded) 4:30AM PST Nov15 Extreme Weather events
Marc Morano (recorded) 5:00AM PST Nov15 The Politics of Alarmism
Dr. Ross McKittrick (recorded) 6AM PST Nov15 Energy. Pollution, Economics
Dr. Richard Lindzen (live) 7AM PST Nov15 Bait and Switch Aspects of the Global Warming Issue
Christopher Monckton (live) 8AM PST Nov15 Climate Sensitivity
Andrew Montford (live) 9AM PST Nov15 The Hockey Stick/28Gate
Dr. Roy Spencer (live) 10AM PST Nov15 What Causes Climate Change?
Steve McIntyre (live) 11AM PST Nov15 The Climate Year in Review: a new focus on extremes
Dr. Tim Ball (live) 12PM PST Nov15 Warming – A deception?
Joe Bastardi (live) 1PM PST Nov15 Forecasting extremes
Joe D’Aleo (live) 1:30PM PST Nov15 Extreme weather & Sandy
John Kehr (live) 2PM PST Nov15 The Inconvenient Skeptic
Harold Ambler (live) 3PM PST Nov15 Ignoring Weather History
Maurizo Morabito (live) 3:30PM PST Nov15 BBC’s Twenty Eight Gate
Donna Laframboise (live) 4PM PST Nov15 The IPCC – Unreliable & Untrustworthy
Anthony Watts & Evan Jones (live) 5PM PST Nov15 Update on the surfacestations project and Watts et al paper.
About these ads
This entry was posted in Announcements, Gore-a-thon 2012 and tagged , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

308 Responses to WUWT-TV’s answer to Al Gore’s ‘Dirty Weather Report’ is ON THE AIR

  1. FergalR says:

    Great job Anthony.

  2. BioBob says:

    A good start but the audio cuts in and out, clipping, etc.

  3. Mark Luedtke says:

    Wow. That’s a great line up.

  4. Grey Lensman says:

    Great way to wake up and enjoy breakfast. Alerted my team.

  5. Poptech says:

    Feeds works. Only I noticed is a flickering blue bar at the bottom

  6. Eric Barnes says:

    Awesome Anthony! Looking good!

  7. Graham Green says:

    What a fantastic selection of speakers!

    Unlike the BBC 28.

  8. manfredkintop says:

    Anthony, I’m sure that those of us who are watching are not concerned about lighting, technical issues with Skype, ect. As a broadcast professional, I realize you have quality standards that exceed the requirements of the content. No need to apologize for any glitches throughout the broadcast! I’m enjoying the experience fully aware of what you are working with. Well done!

  9. Eric Anderson says:

    Anthony, thanks for putting this together.

    However, it keeps cutting in and out and dropping bits. I’m on a pretty fast cable modem and don’t have any problems with other streaming (YouTube, Netflix, etc.), so I’m guessing it is a bandwith issue on the front end? Anyway, I don’t know if there is anything that can be done, just wanted to make you aware FYI.

  10. Poptech says:

    Blue bar at the bottom is gone but you have a weird shimmy-shaking now.

  11. Gunga Din says:

    As I feared. It breaks up on me. I took a peak at Algores thing and it acts the same way. It must the hammer and chisel used in my system at this end.
    Look forward to the YouTube clips. I can pause them until the buffer catches up if need be.
    Keep up the good work!
    Thanks to you and all of your guest for what you’re doing.

  12. The word’s getting out, too.

    Tamino’s latest posting mentions CRP’s 24-hour charade (“…Al Gore’s Climate Reality site is kicking off another 24 Hours of Reality broadcast today at [time redacted, let them find it themselves]. I strongly recommend not only that you watch it, but that you get some friends to watch it with you…”

    Problem is, the first few comments refer to WUWT’s alternate programming.

    I’m sure that while there may be a few posters trying to revive Al Gore’s attempt to portray reality, the majority of the discussion will center on the WUWT broadcast.

    You know they’ve tasked someone to watch – so you might give a shout-out to Open Mind.

    In the meantime, sit back and watch heads explode.

  13. Gunga Din says:

    PS I didn’t see Kenji on the schedule. I hope he’ll be in a YouTube clip. I was looking forward to hearing him speak.

    REPLY: He was on video, but looked to be snoozing… -ModE

  14. R. de Haan says:

    Great TV show. Lot’s of trolls posting at the social stream though. This should be regarded as a compliment.

  15. Gunga Din says:

    Another PS, would it help with the cost (the Ads) if I left it playing even though it breaks up to much for me to follow?

  16. E.M.Smith says:

    I think Bob Tisdale’s presentation is finally getting me to understand how ENSO works.

    Would be nice to have a similar look at some cooling interval of the oceans, though, to show how it cools (i.e. does it also do it in jumps where La Nina / El Nino have non-offsetting cooling). It would be the symmetry that would lock down the argument. Probably don’t have the data for it though… (doubt they were collecting the needed data back in the first half of the last century…)

  17. kadaka (KD Knoebel) says:

    Anthony, you should have negotiated a payment from UStream, for stress testing their system with such a high volume of traffic.

    When did you last see a server catch fire?

  18. Gunga Din says:

    Another observation, the actual live people seem to come through better than the “live” video clips. FYI

  19. Reg. Blank says:

    I’ve got the WUWT ustream feed and the Gorefest ustream side by side here. Unfortuately for the Gore team, the ustream player shows the current number of viewers, and the total count of views.

    At about 02:05 GMT (6:05 PM PST I think) I noticed the total Gore views tick past 300k views, with something like 9000 current viewers. As I start typing this (at about 02:50 GMT) the views has gone past 500k views, with a current viewership of 11200 viewers. The WUWT stream has smaller figures, but the total views figure is not climbing at all to the same extent.

    I suspect one of three things is happening.

    1) ustream is having major technical problems where the users are having to reload on the Gore stream to try to get it to work–whereas the WUWT feed seems OK.

    2) The Gorefest is actually getting hundreds of thousands of individual viewers but they are getting bored really quickly and stop watching.

    3) I don’t like to say this since Al Gore’s and his team are all decent upstanding honourable people, but it seems possible to me that there’s some automated “hit fiddling” going on to boost the viewing figures. Perhaps it is not them doing it, but those nasty deniers trying to discredit the Climate Reality Project by generating obviously bogus viewing counts. Anyway, I’m sure they will not take the opportunity to claim 6+ million view(er)s after 24 hours of this… activity.

    Anyway, this anomaly has prompted me to run a script that takes a screenshot every 30 seconds with both browser windows side by side which will therefore capture an image of these viewing statistics. This was started at 02:18 GMT so it misses the bit at the start. I’ll extract the data from these images later. It will be interesting to see the viewing figures over time.

    Now it is 03:14 GMT and the “reality” viewing figures are 12100 current viewers with 610k total views.

  20. Herkinderkin says:

    Bloomin’ satellite internet connection too slow at this time of the evening in rural New Zealand, so I’ll have to wait for the youtube versions.

    Meanwhile, best wishes to you and the whole team, Anthony

  21. ossqss says:

    I would ask his take on how the U.N. Agenda 21 plays into what we see today with with respect energy policy ?

  22. Reg. Blank says:

    Oh well, I had to reload the Gore stream a few minutes after my last comment because the current viewer count seemed to freeze. The viewing stats no longer appear on that stream. There are still stats on a reload of the WUWT stream.
    I suspect something got turned off.
    No matter, I have an hour of screenshots with counters.

  23. Zeke says:

    You guys don’t attend many web seminars and live science presentations, do you? Technical difficulties always keep us humble, as we search out the mysteries and laws of the universe. (:

  24. ntesdorf says:

    The Presenters and the content of the Talks is first-rate. The advertising is very annoying but I understand that it part of the underpinning. This is a presentation rich in facts, depth and perspective unlike the Clown-Show on the great Gore-a-thon.

  25. Bob Tisdale says:

    Thanks, Anthony!!!!

  26. Grey Lensman says:

    Ultimately its not the science but the politics. This Chriss Horners presentation is absolutely spot on and needs much wider coverage

  27. GaryM says:

    Trying to view Judith Curry’s site, WordPress indicates the blog has been suspended for violation of terms of service\.

    Anyone know WUWT?

  28. bikermailman says:

    Big thumbs up Anthony et al! RE the ‘did you know’ on forests growing next to glaciers: I’ve seen forests growing ON glaciers in Alaska! Strange but true! Glad to see I won’t have to get up early to see Lord Monckton tomorrow.

  29. pat says:

    watching tv and learning…and thinking…how novel!

    give me content over style any day.

    difficulties commenting as well, but not to worry.

  30. jaypan says:

    This is an outstanding event. Congratulations Anthony.
    There are few small tech issues, but who cares?

  31. E.M.Smith says:

    @Anthony:

    Sometimes audio can have breakup on Skype if folks talk fast and shift syllables fast. Slowing down and spending more time on each syllable lets it encode each one. Not as effective as killing the video, but it can help with minor ‘break up’ problems.

  32. Reg. Blank says:

    Just noticed the Gore team have switched to a “total views” only count (coming up to 1 million), leaving out the current viewers count. So I’ll start collecting screenshots again for the stats.

  33. kadaka (KD Knoebel) says:

    @ GaryM,

    Judith Curry’s site’s recent Google cache version looks good. Last story posted was an hour ago (10:06 PM EST), “Policy, rhetoric and public bewilderment”. Features only a long Mark Thompson quote on the main page “teaser”.

    Googling the beginning of the quote with the name turned up one other usage, where it’s given in the comments of a recent Bishop Hill piece featuring a lecture at Oxford given by Mark Thompson, former head of the BBC, with Thompson getting skewered in the BH comments.

    Side question: Is there a “official” Bishop Hill blog to be used for linking, the other site is just a (temporary?) mirror?

    http://www.bishop-hill.net/blog/2012/11/12/mark-thompson-on-the-gwpf.html

    http://bishophill.squarespace.com/blog/2012/11/12/mark-thompson-on-the-gwpf.html (original site)

    Maybe Thompson didn’t like the attention, and put in a claim of copyright violation or some such nonsense.

  34. lance says:

    great shots of the Member of Concerned Scienists!!!

  35. Keith Minto says:

    Audio/video fine here in Canberra on my 2Mb/sec ethernet connection using FF.
    No buffering or breakups.

  36. Don says:

    Thanks, Anthony and all! Y’all reek credibility and class. I gotta say, though, that I expected Kenji to look more concerned.

  37. I’m getting a bad echo.

  38. zefal says:

    Don’t lick your privates, Kenji. If we wanted to see someone do that we’d be over at al’s place.
    BTW, It’s 117 degrees in ST. Louis.

  39. As soon as I posted that the echo stopped.

  40. eyesonu says:

    Anthony, this show rocks!

    Ryan Maue was superb!

  41. atlstnspc says:

    Darn. I can’t watch this on my iPhone.

  42. Grey Lensman says:

    Sorry Moshe and Fuller, you sound like good guys caught with their hands in the cookie jar. I can sense your problem, ethics and truth. How do you defend, for example lying to ensure the truth gets out, such actions, only to find the ends do not justify the means.

    You are close to admitting to yourselves, that you have been had.

  43. E.M.Smith says:

    Mosher is saying no one would argue his temperature graph isn’t close to what really happens. Well, I would argue it. The temperature record is so “cooked” we have no idea what is correct. Furthermore, the temperature now is not significantly different from the ’30s. As I kid I listened closely to ‘old folks’ about what they experienced. They lived through hotter times than I did, and it’s not noticeably warmer now than then.

    There’s a 60 year cycle, and there was a cold LIA, but the idea that NOW is warming compared to the history of prior centuries is just wrong. From the Roman Optimum to the other Medieval Warm period, this time is not warmer.

  44. Fuller , “The debate is about sensitivity.”

    The debate is also about what measured change (temperature, sea ice, etc) changes can be attributed to what causes. Until we do that we are in position to empirically determine the effects of CO2.

  45. In my haste I missed ‘not’.

    Until we do that we are not in a position

  46. E.M.Smith says:

    Basically, look at this graph of the Holocene:

    And then say that rapid warming (or cooling) is abnormal at all, and that the past has not been warm.

  47. Roger Sowell says:

    Excellent! Enjoyed watching.

  48. pat says:

    now that i know a certain oddity is repeating every half hour or so, which i presume means anthony is not aware of it, i’d like to know if anyone else gets an ad for blackmores vitamins, which is ear-splittingly loud and screeching, like heavy metal music, which seems extremely out of place for a vitamins ad.

    it is soooooooooooo loud and grating, i am sure some viewers would find it disturbing, as it comes without warning and volume needs to be switched to almost zero til it finishes, and then turn up the volume to continue with the presentation.

  49. Poptech says:

    The Skeptical Science “crusher crew” is trying to spam the social stream,

    http://www.populartechnology.net/2012/09/skeptical-science-drown-them-out.html

  50. Manfred says:

    Very strong presentation from Dr. Maue. His reference is the IPCC report, while Al Gore’s reference is Photoshop.

  51. davidmhoffer says:

    I did not buy Mosher and Fuller’s book, and I am increasingly glad I did not. They sounded much more like journalists attempting to strike a middle ground lest they lose access to the key players on one side or the other than investigators determined to call a spade a spade. No one who reads the climategate emails and has even a shred of ethics should be anything less than outraged at the behaviour of the “hockey team”. I heard rationalization of the team’s actions where there should instead have been condemnation by Mosher and Fuller.

    The one thing they got correct was that the debate is ultimately about sensitivity. On this I would make the point that I have made many times before. If sensitivity was high, we wouldn’t be having this debate, the impact on global temps would be pronounced and unequivocal. It is not, we can barely discern the signal if indeed that is what we are discerning at all. If sensitivity is low, then we have nothing to be alarmed about, and that is precisely what the preponderance of evidence points to.

  52. GeologyJim says:

    Great show – look forward to reviewing the parts I haven’t been able to see due to other commitments.

    I’m a 40-year career geologist whose specialty can best be described as “regional geology”. I’ve researched a wide range of topical areas across the whole span of geologic time – Early Proterozoic to the Holocene. I’ve done no research directly on either climate change or hydrocabon resources.

    QUESTION: Earth has experiened a very wide range of temperature regimes as well as atmospheric CO2 contents over a few billion years of time. NO TIPPING POINT HAS EVER TRANSPIRED. No matter how hot it became (e.g., in the Eocene), it always cooled. No matter how cold it became (e.g., in the Permian), it always warmed back to middle ground.

    One could make similar statements about the Pleistocene Ice Ages of the last 2 million years. Think about the T and CO2 curves (from ice-core data) showcased in Gore’s “An Inconvenient Truth”. Every interglacial warm period ended (i.e., persistent cooling began) when CO2 was at its highest level. Equally, every glacial period ended (i.e., warming began rapidly) when CO2 was at its lowest level.

    In face of these data, how can any sentient being conclude that CO2 is a major player in temperature history? How can any credible scientist assert that sensitivity is high and that “tipping points” exist? Billions of years of earth history show that feedbacks must be dominantly negative and that Earth is perfectly capable of moderating its own temperature and atmospheric compsition.

  53. David, excellent presentation.

    What do you think of the proposition that the primary cause of 20th century warming is reduced aerosols and particulates, and the increased solar insolation from decreased aerosol seeded clouds, which have declined in line (in the developed world) with temperature rises. As evidence for this I point to India, where aerosol/particulate pollution has substantially increased and temperatures generally declined over the 20th century, except during the monsoon which washes aerosols out of the atmosphere?

  54. pat says:

    should have added that my sound is through speakers connected to the tv, so i cannot simply click the mute button, but must get up and go over to the speaker controls. yes, i could detach the speakers, but won’t be cos i have everything set up just as i want and have never exerienced such a vast volume difference before.

  55. Mike Jowsey says:

    Dr. David Evans: The ARGO chart showing Predictions vs. Reality was scaled at 0.01 degree. Can the ARGO buoys actually measure temperature to that degree? If not, would it not cast aspersions over a ‘Reality’ plot on the graph? I mean, what are the error bars on the Reality line?

  56. E.M.Smith says:

    The Dr. David Evans presentation is just stunning. Wonderfully done.

  57. Streetcred says:

    I’m really enjoying this ! Thank you Anthony and all of your contributors.

  58. Zeke says:

    Inre the economic and power disparity between skeptics and warmists in Dr. David Evans slide:

    This is now being addressed by using “non-profit” and “charity” organizations to advance the same science. But charities can accept anonymous gifts and matching grants while claiming independence from influence. I don’t mind but no halo. Also, there is an organized effort to actually create more “citizen scientists” by the National Science Foundation.

    ref: http://www.nsf.gov/news/news_summ.jsp?cntn_id=125599&WT.mc_id=USNSF_51&WT.mc_ev=click
    final paragraphs

  59. kadaka (KD Knoebel) says:

    Ack! Around 1:30AM EST I was trying to reload this page, but there was a “too long to respond” error. Tried again, got “can’t connect” error. Tried to load main page at different tab, still not working. The site was gone!

    And I had just reported about Curry’s WordPress site being down, and now Anthony’s WordPress site is gone…

    Did the Minions of Gore decide NOW was the Great Day of Reckoning, during their High Priest’s marathon revival service, and begun shutting down the sites of heretics and apostates?

    But then about 1:34 WUWT was loading again.

    Anthony, did you overload WordPress?

  60. davidmhoffer says:

    Dr. David Evans:

    Wow.

  61. Jo,

    Is the title of your talk an allusion to the German Novel, Die Andere Seite. A favourite of mine BTW. In the novel, idealist people move to a new city where initially everything seemed wonderful and progressive, but it descends into a nightmare.

  62. This has been great! Anthony I am so pleased with how this has worked. A few kinks here and there, but the info is coming across.

    I just finished watching Dr. Evans’ and Joanne Nova’s time and it was THE BEST so far. I was actually excited for when this gets released by you on YouTube.

    I look forward to spreading these videos around and showing the facts. SO GOOD!

    These videos, especially those done in the style of Dr. Evans, are extremely important in reaching a larger audience. I will proudly write about and display these on my blog.

    Thanks again!

  63. Michael Larkin says:

    Anthony–Dr. David Evan’s presentation was absolutely outstanding and I’d love for there to be a downloadable recording. Will there be a recording available? Would it be accessible from the resources section, perhaps?

  64. eyesonu says:

    This entire presentation is absolutely astounding. I will have to view the rest of it post presentation.

    Very well done Anthony!

  65. johanna says:

    Getting perfect reception on my wireless broadband here in Canberra, Australia.

    Great stuff so far. The David Evans ‘primer’ was brilliant – needs to be seen more widely by the general public.

  66. Konrad says:

    Help, i get the ads but then the player crashes. tried the alternate link – no joy. does anyone have any ides?

  67. Nigel S says:

    Congratulations, love to be watching but I haven’t paid for a BBC Licence so I can’t watch live (true, not ‘Sarc’ at all).

  68. vukcevic says:

    “curryja.wordpress.com is no longer available.
    This blog has been archived or suspended for a violation of our Terms of Service.”

    This looks suspicious.

  69. Jimbo says:

    I doubt if the BBC seminar would have arrived at their conclusion about the ‘settled science’ had the guys you interviewed been present in 2006. On the other had the heads of BBC comedy, drama, political programming, Church of England were present so perhaps they had already arrived at their conclusion.

    Hope all goes well in presenting the other side’s view as the BBC promised to do in “From Seesaw to Wagon Wheel: safeguarding impartiality in the 21st century” – oh the irony.

  70. Keith says:

    Brilliant work, Antony and all your guests

  71. R John says:

    Thanks so much for doing this!!! Thanks to all the presenters, too!!!

  72. rk says:

    anthony , it is pretty obviously that the next step is to tidy up the digital copies of this stuff…package with the pdfs, presentations etc. …. then the mortals can listen to these over a couple of week period..

  73. Brian Johnson uk says:

    Someone please make PM David Cameron and his Cabinet watch/listen to Burt Rutan/WUWT/Telecast

  74. Dave Evans presentation was first class. He covered a lot of ground on the data, the theories, the models and their missed prediction, and the politics – why all this matters. “Follow the money” It would be difficult to find anything to cut to make a shorter presentation. It is all good stuff.

    So I hesitate to suggest something missing. One of the strongest skeptical arguments is, “Suppose the earth IS warming because of CO2. Why is that a bad thing?” Let’s imaging a future where the Earth warms by 2 deg C on average. And another future where it cools 2 deg C. Which future has crop failures? Which future do people starve. Do more people die in the hotter future or the colder futures? The Alarmists jump from higher CO2 to higher temps to worse environment with no data and 100% faith.

    I enjoyed seeing Jo Nova’s cameo. It s good to get to know the players in the varsity squad.

  75. I look forward to rewatching Burt Rutan’s presentation from Youtube. I’ve seen his slide shows from 2 years back, but the refresh he did for this show is a treasure. Getting the IPCC reviewers comments was a great add. The background of his office with the slanted bookshelf s classic Rutan: why use bookends when a slope bookshelf holds them better.

  76. Does anyone know why WordPress has done this at Climate etc.?

    “curryja.wordpress.com is no longer available.
    This blog has been archived or suspended for a violation of our Terms of Service.”

    Are they now taking down any blog that dares to be counter to the AGW message? I think we should be demanding an answer.

  77. jantarml says:

    I am disappointed. I have now tried to watch a number of times, but the streaming is so broken that I can only get sound for around 2 seconds out of every 10. Hopefully I’ll be able to watch the best bits on line later.

  78. AB says:

    Wonderfully informative!

  79. From the Boy who Cried Warming: The bit about the ice cap on Mars shrinking as seen from telescopic observations from 1960s to 1990s and confirmed by Global Surveyor is a claim worth a return. It is either a stunning coincidence, error in data collection, or smoking gun that “It’s the Sun, Stupid!” I can’t think of a fourth possibility.

  80. wayne says:

    Anthony… what a super, super program you’ve put together, couldn’t ask for more. It’s amazing how much clearer all of this information is when concentrated back to back and real faces and voices are attached.

    It might be too early to ask, but are the presenters going to supply a link for WUWT readers to the slides and graphics each used? Maybe best with permission to copy and use some of their segments if attribution was always given. Most like Burt’s are already easily available but I’m asking specific of Dr. Evans presentation, something of the way he gathered his thoughts on the historical and political aspects, on the ‘regulating class’, on this fiasco sure would help when speaking to those leaning to the warm side. That was an excellent way to open their eyes to their actual wrong place in the hierarchy, most if them are not kings, popes, or bishops of climate warming either, and does it all without ever saying one word directly against them. Very neat.

  81. I forgot to add I loved Rutan’s aside about why it is true that talking to plants makes them grow better: You are breathing CO2 on them. Moist, warm, CO2 rich air…. heaven.

  82. Kev-in-Uk says:

    great presentations, great job – shame about the audio dropouts. I also hope the post presentation recordings can be prepared/uploaded pretty quickly to enable review of those parts I’ve missed.
    best regards
    Kev

  83. Feeds works. Only I noticed is a flickering blue bar at the bottom

  84. Stephen Richards says:

    Living in rural france is not conducive to watching live feeds from USA, sadly. I ill catch the utube version. However, Anthony, Thanks for your work, your honesty and that of your presenters.

  85. Stephen Richards says:

    Brian Johnson uk says:

    November 14, 2012 at 11:46 pm
    Someone please make PM David Cameron and his Cabinet watch/listen to Burt Rutan/WUWT/Telecast

    Brian

    Don’t be stupid ;) They don’t watch anything more engaging than Sesame Street.

  86. Stephen Richards says:

    Brilliant, brilliant, brilliant and I love the change in the heading at the top of the blog. Gore is stunning.

  87. Grey Lensman says:

    Burt was simply great, his slides ideal, simple and to the point for all. No rocket science needed.

  88. All working fine here in West Oz at 5:30pm GST+8.
    Anthony, THANK YOU!

  89. wayne says:

    If you can control the bit rates (like on The Boy who Cried Warming movie) and are set at HD 480, maybe 360 sure would help. Somewhere along the ol bit-chain even my high speed link that normally can just keep up at 480 is breaking up about every 20 seconds.

  90. RokShox says:

    Wow. Judith Curry’s Climate Etc. blog has been taken down.

  91. zootcadillac says:

    I’m quite miffed with myself. 30 minutes before the start ( that was 1am here ) I lay down to pass the time with a bit of TV as I waited. Woke up 7 hours later having missed all the good bits ( well most of them, had no interest in luke warmers Mosher & Fuller try with more of their sitting on the fence alarmism through the back door. )

    Hopefully there will be youtube presentations of the live talks available. It would be a travesty if they were missing in the future debate.

    Been enjoying the recorded filler as America sleeps but I’ve seen it all before.

  92. Linked at Zero Hedge. Will link again later today.

  93. Jimbo says:

    The weather is getting worse. New paper just out. Pay attention Al Gore

    “Little change in global drought over the past 60 years”

    http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v491/n7424/full/nature11575.html

    H/t Marc Morano

  94. Well done Anthony. In the UK the video is fine, the sound poor to intermittent which makes things difficult to follow. I will view on Youtube.
    Mind you anything is better than Gore droning on.

  95. D Böehm says:

    davidmhoffer says:

    “The one thing they got correct was that the debate is ultimately about sensitivity. On this I would make the point that I have made many times before. If sensitivity was high, we wouldn’t be having this debate, the impact on global temps would be pronounced and unequivocal. It is not, we can barely discern the signal if indeed that is what we are discerning at all. If sensitivity is low, then we have nothing to be alarmed about, and that is precisely what the preponderance of evidence points to.”

    Spot on. Where is the global warming from the rise in CO2??

    Real world evidence shows conclusively that sensitivity to CO2 must be so low that it can be completely disregarded. Thus, the “carbon” scare is ipso facto falsified.

    Any questions?

  96. I totally agree with Geologytim. Nothing in our geological past would lead anyone to believe that CO2 was a climate driver.
    To paraphrase Clinton- ”It’s the sun stupid”

  97. RB says:

    Had to chuckle hearing John Coleman describe Margaret Thatcher as the Prime Minister of England.

  98. Richard111 says:

    Sadly too jerky and dissjointed to watch on my laptop here in the UK. But from what I have seen I would happily buy a DVD or two if such becomes available.

  99. pat says:

    just posted these cached versions of judith curry’s pages on bishop hill in response to a comment by omnologos from memory mentioning mark thompson was being quoted last time he went to her site. now i don’t see the comment i responded to:

    cached version of homepage with the Mark Thompson quote:

    ClimateEtc: Policy, rhetoric and public bewilderment
    Posted on November 14, 2012 | Leave a comment
    by Judith Curry
    Science is the most formidable intellectual force of our age, perhaps any age. The irony is that, without the insights of the humanities, it may still find itself without words. – Mark Thompson
    Continue reading →

    http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:5Hf4842Llg0J:judithcurry.com/+%22judith+curry%22+%22mark+thompson%22&cd=2&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=au

    full cached version:

    Policy, rhetoric and public bewilderment
    Posted on November 14, 2012 | Leave a comment
    by Judith Curry

    Science is the most formidable intellectual force of our age, perhaps any age. The irony is that, without the insights of the humanities, it may still find itself without words. – Mark Thompson

    Bishop Hill points to a remarkable essay by Mark Thompson, the former head of the BBC. This was a lecture given at Oxford about science and rhetoric, focusing on the climate change debate and the problems of the Global Warming Policy Foundation. It is rather lengthy (16 pages), the whole essay is well worth reading. I excerpt here the parts of his argument that I found particularly interesting:

    I’m going to explore the present state of the argument from authority through a single prism—namely the way in which science is handled in argumentation about public policy. And I’m going to attempt to tease apart a paradox which genuinely perplexes most of the scientists that Iknow, which is this: almost everyone accepts that science gives us our most secure understanding of the physical world – so why doesn’t it always carry the day?

    Surely, if anything can, science can pierce what I’ve called the cloud of unknowing and replace public bewilderment with public enlightenment. So why is it so often questioned and challenged by non-scientists witout anyone accusing them of stupidity or absurdity? Why, when it comes to public policy formulation or media discussions, is science typically regarded as one of the considerations rather than the card that trumps every other card?

    Hume’s sense that science represents an epistemological gold standard almost universal today. Like most non-scientists of my age and background, I accept that fundamental authority completely and whenever it comes to an argument I usually find myself instinctively on the side of mainstream science. I don’t do that because I have personally checked the evidence which underpins The Origin of Species or examined Bohr’s or Schrodinger’s equations: I haven’t the expertise to do either. No, I back science because I find Popper’s account of the scientific method and its falsifiability intellectually compelling and because, at the level of common sense, the explanatory and predictive success of science is so overwhelming. Moreover, I’ve spent enough time with scientists to be wholly convinced that the culture and practice of science genuinely aim at truth.

    As non-scientists then, our acceptance of the primacy of science is based less on our own scientific training than on a mixture of cultural, social and philosophical factors. This is exactly what is implied by the argumentum ad verecundiam if you can work out the equation for yourself, after all, you don’t have to take it on trust.

    At the same time, many of us know that it’s too simplistic to say that science always and immediately right. Sometimes there’s not enough data, or the puzzle of what the data means has yet to cracked, or the whole thing is still a work in progress: sometimes, in other words, the science is or at least appears unfinished.

    On other occasions, scientists disagree there are rival explanations, or there’s one candidate explanation which some sicntists back but others oppose: in these cases, the science is disputed.

    On still other occasions, someone may call into question the good faith of the scientists – they’rein the pay of the government or Big Pharma or they’re committed to some cause and therefore their work may lack impartiality and thus reliability: we might call this corrupted or even perverted science.

    We also know that, on a few very rare occasions, there have been dramatic revolutions in the history of science when a consensus view has been overturned in favour of a radical new theory Copernicus, Einstein and that, before such revolutions, scientific group-think is possible; this is what Lee Smolin alleged about contemporary American physics and M-theory and string theory in his 2006 book The Trouble with Physics, though one would need to understand the science rather better than I do to judge whether he’s right or not.

    So as we listen to a given scientific debate, in theory any number of doubts can appear. Yes, of course we still believe in the authority of good, finished, honest science but maybe in this case it’s not quite ready; or maybe we’re in the middle of a he-says-she-says wrangle and God only knows who’s right; or maybe there is something fishy about the way that report was paid for; or maybe that lone scientist I heard on the radio is right and it’s the other 99% of physicists who will be proven wrong in the end. In an age of pervasive suspicion and uncertainty, and it doesn’t take much for the weevils to get to work.

    Sometimes one comes across a letter about some matter of public concern signed by a long list of notables from many different and unconnected backgrounds: this is authority sliced and diced and repackaged like the Collateralised Debt Obligations which precipitated the financial crisis, authority each piece of which may be far from its point of origin and justification, but where it’s still hoped that the whole can be greater than the parts.

    We might have hoped that authority might be one sure way of piercing the cloud of unknowing. Instead, we find that even the most clear-cut authority, that derived from science, can find itself in the most opaque, impenetrable regions of the cloud. And if what I’ve said this evening is true of science, it is probably even more true of economics and the other social sciences, indeed of any area of professional expertise which intersects with the world of public debate and policy.

    Misrepresentation is undoubtedly often part of the problem, but it’s too easy to blame the public’s lack of knowledge of, or unwillingness to trust science entirely on the dark forces of misrepresentation. When science enters the public arena, it almost always ends up having to play by at least some of the rules of that arena, rules which often confuse the question of authority. It also finds itself in competition with radically asymmetrical rhetorical forces which derive their power from the spheres of morality, culture, superstition, even the mystic.

    But to wish we could eliminate those ‘divisive cultural meanings’ is to wish away the freedom and openness on which modern democracies are built –and, short of dictatorship, its impossible to achieve anyway. In my view our task rather is to find practical ways of helping the public to pick their own way through this difficult, cluttered landscape. I’ve tried this evening to give some examples of how it is possible to parse public statements about science and disentangle them so that one can analyse and understand the different elements: exposition, assertion, opinion and advocacy. It takes time and, in its own way, a little training. Our challenge is how to encourage more people to take the time and acquire the skills to do this for themselves

    http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:QKSn2u4sU7EJ:judithcurry.com/2012/11/14/policy-rhetoric-and-public-bewilderment/+http://judithcurry.com/2012/11/14/policy-rhetoric-and-public-bewilderment/%23more-10472&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=au

  100. Mr Lynn says:

    Breaking up here, making listening very difficult. I’m on RCN cable; usually streaming works flawlessly.

    /Mr Lynn

  101. Stephen Wilde says:

    The portion about the solar amplifier via UV variations is very close to my proposals.

  102. Henry Clark says:

    At the time of writing this:

    The Gore show has a 1:750 ratio of followers to total view count (total visitors). Reg. Blank’s earlier post implied it had a ratio of around 1:30+ in active viewers at one time earlier to total view count (total visitors), declining to 1:50 a hour later and so on. While the front page coverage causes many to click once there, probably only several percent or less watch for long. The number of real watchers is definitely not remotely near the nominal 2.4 million view figure. A moderate number of thousands may watch fully, but by far most are just internet browsers effectively glancing only to rapidly move on.

    Although WUWT lacks comparable front page coverage and advertising, naturally having a lesser total visitor count (9041 so far), WUWT has a 7 times higher ratio of followers to visitor count (1:110 instead of 1:750) and probably also a higher ratio of real watchers to visitor count. Besides, about everyone has already been saturated with hearing CAGW movement claims before throughout the media many times before, whereas skeptical presentations are more likely to be novel to someone and thus more likely to have an impact per viewer. Personally I was particularly pleased to see how close contacts WUWT has with Senator Inhofe, because a senator passing on information if needed can affect other senators, and, indirectly, potentially influence odds of passage or blocking of legislation potentially affecting all 300 million people in the U.S.

  103. Anthony, thank you very much for putting the program together. It is amazing that you were able to overcome the difficulties of producing a program with contributors from different arts of the world in real time.

  104. I do not object to the use of adverts unless they break in across other selected web sites which yours (?) are doing. This is an invasion of privacy.

  105. RB says:

    Dr Luning

    Thank you

    ***appause***

  106. JohnWho says:

    What I’ve watched so far has been excellent.

    I would suggest that a link to the streaming be moved to the front page. The only link there is to Al Gore’s effort.

  107. James Bull says:

    I have l learned so much in the last few hours, great job of putting it all together. Make sure you get a rest when it is done you deserve it so much.
    Well Done.
    James Bull

  108. Nick says:

    As this site has an international audience, it would be more helpful if times could be posted in GMT. Most people know how to convert GMT into their Local time, but how do I convert PST (whatever that is) to my local time?

    [Reply: PST is GMT minus 8. — mod.]

  109. Mike Smith – very articulate – very good.

  110. pat says:

    17 Nov: Spectator: James Delingpole: Here’s a BBC scandal that should really make you disgusted

    http://www.spectator.co.uk/columnists/james-delingpole/8758121/heres-a-bbc-scandal-that-should-really-make-you-disgusted/

  111. pat says:

    at the top of this page, is the blackmores vitamins ad (with gentle, calme soundtrack) which has been interrupting presentations in australia, sometimes every 10 or 15 minutes, except for the period of when the docus were shown. however, when it interrupts the broadcast, it is pure static, screeching and at first was accompanied by heavy metal music, with no dialogue. the volume level of the noise is unbelievable.

    http://www.blackmores.com.au/about-blackmores/media-centre/media-releases/blackmores-voted-australias-most-trusted-vitamin-and-supplement-brand

  112. Francisco says:

    What happened to Judith Curry’s blog? It’s gone. Says violation of terms of service (???)

  113. upcountrywater says:

    Just a luck of the draw, dropping by to view this…. Great videos… works great here in Peoples state of Hawaii….

  114. meltemian says:

    Thank you Anthony, apart from having to refresh occasionally I’m getting it loud and clear here in Greece.

  115. zootcadillac says:

    @Pat

    I don’t see any adverts on this page in firefox with adblock plus ( apologies Anthony but you’ll get more from me in direct contributions than you will by me clicking ads that have no relevance to me )

    I don’t as yet see any adverts in the video stream. I expect that this is geographical. So perhaps if you don’t want adverts in the stream view it via an EU proxy.

  116. Tom Barr says:

    EXPERIMENT! go to Al Gore’s 24 Hours of lies and bullshit, and post the truth. I have done so, and my posts are being removed. The best lie I have seen posted so far is that 3.3 billion! viewers are watching it! Try it yourself…

  117. tallbloke says:

    Reblogged this on Tallbloke's Talkshop and commented:
    Add your thoughts here… (optional)

  118. Eliza says:

    judith curry site suspended

  119. DavidM says:

    Loved Ross Mckitrick’s presentation – very clear and informative on the issues.

  120. Jimbo says:

    24 Hours Of Climate Reality
    Floods and rainstorms damage our homes and cities. Crops wilt under severe droughts. Hot, dry weather sparks widespread fires.

    This is what is known as climate change. Except when one parameter doesn’t.

    We could even be headed for wetter times, says Justin Sheffield of Princeton University.”

    http://www.newscientist.com/article/mg21628914.600-link-between-global-warming-and-drought-questioned.html

    “Little change in global drought over the past 60 years”

    http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v491/n7424/full/nature11575.html

    I do wish these people would get their story straight. If they were a gang of criminal in different cells at a police station their story would soon unravel. Oh wait………….

  121. Jimbo says:

    Sorry I missed the S
    “….gang of criminalS in….”

  122. _Jim says:

    Eliza says November 15, 2012 at 6:44 am

    “judith curry site suspended”

    – – – – – – – – – –

    Very strange … visiting her URL shows this:

    curryja.wordpress.com is no longer available.

    This blog has been archived or suspended for a violation of our Terms of Service.

    – – – – – – – – – –

    BTW, good show Anthony and company.

  123. Richards in Vancouver says:

    McKittrick was outstanding.

  124. Tony McGough says:

    Alas! no joy at all trying to watch WUWT-TV – all I see is a slide and a snatch of sound, one or two seconds max, then blackness and silence. I am in England, using a chromebook.

    I hope we get to see things – or edited highlights – when you get back into your normal sleep cycle …

  125. ossqss says:

    How does Dr. Linzen feel our understanding of cloud and cloud formation impact our overall understanding of climate forcings and or feedbacks. Perhaps I should ask how our lack of understanding of clouds or cloud formation handicaps our understanding of the climate system?

  126. torquewille says:

    Anthony, you’re the man! Here’s a hot tip on some royalty free and not bad background music that you can download and use: http://incompetech.com/music/royalty-free/

  127. Peter Miller says:

    Just watched the Goreathon for 15 minutes.

    It was the most unsubstantiated alarmist BS I have seen in a long time. Earnest middle aged ladies pleading for everyone to see the sense of their own highly emotive opinions, plus more ‘ifs’, ‘maybes’, ‘coulds’ and ‘scientists predict’ than you can shake a stick at. Also, it was all far too slick for my taste. However, when it came to the subject of current droughts in part of the Middle East being definitely caused by global warming, shown along with a backdrop of desert sand dunes, I finally decided to give up.

    After all, recurring droughts in the Middle East have been part of the deal of living there ever since biblical times.

  128. Power Grab says:

    Re the Monckton presentation – wouldn’t taking the timeline back before 1860 help make the point that current warming (since 1860) is actually a reflection of the fact that we have been warming because the Little Ice Age was deemed to have ended?

  129. Hi Anthony,

    A question I would like to be asked to one of your experts is this. If warmists 0.7 of warming is

  130. pat says:

    zootcadillac –

    i’ve learned to adapt to te ad interference; i’m only documenting it because it is not legit; during marc morano’s presentation, the ad was interrupting every 10 or 15 minutes. blackmores is a respectable company and would be horrified to know an ad of theirs had been doctored, with extreme loud noises replacing their own soundtrack and then used to interrupt anthony’s programming. it has not come back since morano. tomorrow i will contact blackmores, but wish i had had the technical ability to record it to forward to them.

    early presentations, it was interrupting approx every half hour. when anthony went to docus it stopped. returned with a vengeance only or morano.

    the noise accompanying the ad is/was so loud and jarring, it would have put off less interested viewers, i am sure. can’t imagine it was only affecting my feed.

  131. zootcadillac says:

    my sincere gratitude to Lord Monkton for persevering through his presentation despite being clearly unwell. No doubt his opponents will mumble something about ‘coughgate’ and dismiss him.

  132. GSW says:

    Question for Lord Monckton: I’ve seen past presentations where you’ve talked about cyclone/Hurricane intensity/frequency. I may have missed this in your current talk (adverts appologies). Do you have anything to say about Hurricane Sandy? in particular the scientific basis for links to climate change and statements made by McKibben etc?

  133. Grey Lensman says:

    Lord Chris, did the job, sent them all packing to Tyburn Cross.

    Brilliant

  134. Anthony commented that he looked for questions to the presenter (Monckton at the time) somewhere. Is that in this thread? There’s also a chat channel at Ustream where people comment (and badly in need of a moderator) but if we’re supposed to ask questions here then maybe we can move people’s attention over :)

  135. Hi Anthony again,

    Sorry for not entering my question correctly. My question to ask you experts was this. If warmist believe that a future warming of 1 or 2 degrees is likely to raise global temperatures to a dangerous tipping point, wouldn’t the rise in temperature of perhaps 20C that occurs when we move from winter to summer bring about the same effect? In comparison, 1 or 2 degrees seems extremely small. Similarly, why doesn’t an exceptionally hot summer in, for eg. Europe, when temperatures are above average initiate the same effect?

    Regards William S

  136. ttfn says:

    Does Mr Montford’s book explain exactly what decline Mike (Mann) hid using this trick? I know what decline Briffa hid, but I’m fuzzy on where Mann used this trick.

  137. MikeN says:

    This is just too painful to watch. I’ll wait for the youtube videos.

  138. John Whitman says:

    Troed Sångberg says:

    November 15, 2012 at 9:16 am

    Anthony commented that he looked for questions to the presenter (Monckton at the time) somewhere. Is that in this thread? There’s also a chat channel at Ustream where people comment (and badly in need of a moderator) but if we’re supposed to ask questions here then maybe we can move people’s attention over :)

    = = = = = = =

    Troed Sångberg

    Both this tread and the USTREAM’s social stream thread are being looked at for questions to forward to Anthony so he can ask the live interviewees.

    I would recommend it more likely to get a question forwarded to Anthony from this thread. The USTREAM social stream is not a very easy environment for capturing questions.

    John

  139. C. Edgar says:

    I certainly hope a DVD will be made available of this excellent broadcast, I’ve watched about 10 hours total but have missed ones I wanted to see because of the time slots allocated. I would like to thank all of the participants for sharing their excellent presentations.

  140. pat says:

    delusional but probably right – there will not be a CO2 tax:

    14 Nov: Grist: David Roberts: There’s not gonna be a carbon tax
    The hype has reached such an intensity that when the Sith Lord of Republican politics, Grover Norquist, said last week that a carbon tax wouldn’t necessarily violate his sacred anti-tax pledge (something he has said before), everyone went a little nuts, so much so that his organization, Americans for Tax Reform, had to issue a follow-up statement clarifying that, no, really, it “opposes a carbon tax and will work tirelessly to ensure one does not become law.”…
    The fact is, today’s Republican Party contains Big Oil, Big Coal, Big Sprawl (road builders, real estate developers, etc.), Big Ag, rich people, and suburbanites. Every one of those constituencies is deeply invested in the continuation of the fossil-fueled status quo. It wouldn’t matter if Friedrich Hayek himself descended from the heavens on angel wings to sing the carbon-tax gospel. Republicans are going to do what their constituencies tell them (and pay them) to do…
    What action there is on climate in Obama’s second term will be more of the same: nibbling around the edges via EPA and other regulatory tools, doing what can be done without Congress.
    “But David,” you’re protesting. “In the wake of Sandy and an Obama election victory, shouldn’t climate hawks be ambitious? Shouldn’t they shoot for the moon? Set a benchmark for what counts a real action?”
    Why yes! They should. But on substantive grounds, the kind of (fantasy) carbon-tax deals being discussed right now are already a compromise, already a trimming of sails. The mere existence of a carbon tax is not enough, in and of itself, to count as ambition on climate change.

    http://grist.org/climate-energy/theres-not-gonna-be-a-carbon-tax/

  141. Billy Liar says:

    WUWT University! I’m enjoying the lectures. Very well done!

  142. Sigmundb says:

    I have sampled WUW-TV and 24 hours of Reality.
    The scorecard so far is 24 ahead on facilities, production, looks, makeup and emotional appeal. Basically no contest on these points.
    WUW is only a clear winner in the science categories (content, reason and balance) and decency.
    Participants category still open, WUW in a clear lead (a lot of the supporting acts are filler material at 24) but its close enough for 24 to get back in the game, say if they can get a Nobel laureate to back their claims…..
    Maybe the viewer ratings will decide the winner?

    Sarcasm aside, I really appreciate WUW linking to 24, i think that is a show of confidence the arguments can stand their ground.

  143. _Jim says:

    pat says November 15, 2012 at 10:18 am

    The fact is, today’s _______Party contains Big Oil, Big Coal, Big Sprawl (road builders, real estate developers, etc.), Big Ag, rich people, and suburbanites.

    pat, it might be safer if you avoided some of this; I see cannon on the horizon being readied now for loading of a powder charge … (for instance, do you know who GE is and what their business line-up consists of and who they had recently sidled up next to? Please, give it a rest.)

    .

  144. DirkH says:

    William Sluman says:
    November 15, 2012 at 9:21 am
    “If warmist believe that a future warming of 1 or 2 degrees is likely to raise global temperatures to a dangerous tipping point, wouldn’t the rise in temperature of perhaps 20C that occurs when we move from winter to summer bring about the same effect? In comparison, 1 or 2 degrees seems extremely small. Similarly, why doesn’t an exceptionally hot summer in, for eg. Europe, when temperatures are above average initiate the same effect?”

    I asked warmists the same question – why don’t we have localized thermal runaway where CO2 makes water vapor increase in a positive feedback loop. Never got an answer. They usually already run away when one points out that water vapor, not CO2, is the strongest GHG. They don’t like it at all when one says it.

    And what they really really hate is when somebody measures it.
    “A clear prediction of the CO2AGW theory is that positive water vapor feedback should occur AND that the radiating top layer of the troposphere that radiates most of the IR to space should rise.
    Both predictions can be tested, have been tested, and fail:

    http://hockeyschtick.blogspot.co.uk/2012/03/simple-disproof-of-runaway-greenhouse.html

    http://hockeyschtick.blogspot.com/2012/03/simple-disproof-of-runaway-greenhouse.html?showComment=1332558067400#c2031512486689428024

    It is now time for the CO2AGW scientists to accept this failure, come up with a new theory, and make new predictions.

  145. elmer says:

    Can Dr Spencer talk a little bit about what the difference between a scientist and a climate scientist? For instance are meteorologists considered a Climate scientists?

  146. Joe prins@aol.com says:

    As a totally non-scientist………..How do the Al Gore type folks explain:
    a) the change from the last ice age to the present warm period?
    b) the change from the past high Co2 ( in 1000’s) to the let’s say low point in the 1700-1800?
    I simply do not understand how a scientist can ignore actual facts.

  147. Just a Girl says:

    Great talk by Dr Spencer!

  148. Tim says:

    what the hell is with the ‘screaming’ ads?!!! Makes it unwatchable guys! Ruins an otherwise enjoyable site

    REPLY: We can’t control these sorry, hopefully we’ll be able to use a better streaming medium than USTREAM next time -Anthony

  149. ossqss says:

    Android mobile device viewing tip.

    The stream works much better if you select the “request desktop site” option in your browser settings. This applies to a phone or tablet running an ICS or Jelly Bean level OS. I don’t have a Gingerbread level device and don’t know if that option exists there.

    Fantastic show Anthony!

    You and your guests are to be commended for the unprecedented effort and quality of information provided.

    My sincere thanks to all of you!

  150. Justthinkin says:

    “Fuller , “The debate is about sensitivity.”
    Yea. The sensitivity of crooked politicos funding you and your breathen.
    Steve Mac’s bit is coming through,though breakng up a bit.Suspect that is Skype. My cats and I are going to have to catch Kenjii on youtube.
    One question that I hope somebody can answer.As an old fart,engineering degree in 1977,I was taught that energy can neither be created nor destroyed,just transformed. Is that right,or are my brains cells finally fading?

  151. klee12 says:

    Hello

    I’ve listened to just one but it looks great, with lots of information. I hope you are recording these for posterity and will put up a webpage with links to all the recordings like Heartland.

    Thanks for getting such a group together and putting these up

    klee12

  152. Don B says:

    Steve-

    How is the Canadian mining business? (A change of pace)

    Have you read Montford’s new book?

  153. Alec Rawls says:

    I caught Roy Spencer’s interview this morning. Excellent!

  154. E.M.Smith says:

    Anthony,

    bending the head band to reduce pressure on the ears helps. Also setting the ear muff forward on the ear so that the ‘cuff’ lands on a different area (including the bone in front of the ear) lets you move stress to a different area for a while. ( I know you likely know this already, but just in case it helps…) I’ve also used rolled napkins and / or pencil over the ear to shift things off of ‘hot spots’… Then there’s the old standby of setting one ear muff at a time off of each ear (so you keep going on one ear with the other one rests. Also, when ‘off camera’ two fingers holding a muff just off the ear ‘gives it a break’… Oh, and I have two sets of muffs with different shapes. Swapping between them changes pressure points.

  155. David A. Evans says:

    Nigel S says:
    November 14, 2012 at 11:19 pm

    Congratulations, love to be watching but I haven’t paid for a BBC Licence so I can’t watch live (true, not ‘Sarc’ at all).

    Actually, I think this would be viewed as a a webinar which is not classed as a TV broadcast.

    DaveE.

  156. Dodgy Geezer says:

    I’ve just watched the McIntyre presentation. Good one – the major message being that Global Warming seems to add little if any strength to extreme weather, but extreme weather happens, and the major means of surviving it is standard technological preparation; be it drought-resistant grain or sandbags to mend embankments.

    He kept his major hitting point for the end – it appears that NYC was poorly prepared for Hurricane Sandy in part because defence was deemed to consist of cutting CO2 emissions to lower the chance of storms. If no efforts had been diverted into that pointless activity, there would have been more resource to deal with what did happen.

    A point which I think needs to be made to local politicians all over the world…

  157. jeremyp99 says:

    Really, really excellent, Anthony. I’ve been watching on and off since early afternoon GMT, from Frome in Somerset. Quality of the transmission excellent really, given the (ah. and you’re back – unmute!) belt and braces nature of such webcasts. Restarts very quickly when it does freeze, which has been rare. Hopefully Prof. Ball has just gone for a pee :-)

  158. Just a suggestion, but if you are facing dead air for an hour, Replying the Burt Rutan video from 11 pm PST (2 am PST) would better than rambling.

  159. Ulf T says:

    Anthony,

    Re your discomfort with the headphones, I saw a guy on a forum describe how the Sennheiser HD800 work great with a hearing aid. Ridiculously expensive, but maybe some more reasonable models have the same form factor?

  160. usJim says:

    Thank you very much Tim; very enlightening.

  161. zootcadillac says:

    Audio still on between segments Anthony

  162. Jason Salit says:

    Anthony,
    Your mike is OPEN… we can hear you typing (coughing, etc.). It was open during the break when you were getting the Joes on the line…
    Just an FYI.
    This is awesome!!

  163. zootcadillac says:

    OK, I’ve had this on for 11 hours or so and thank you for it however with Joe D’Aleo’s presentation it’s become unwatchable. I’ll look forward to the youtube videos. Thanks all involved.

  164. scotch85354 says:

    Great job, Anthony. I’m watching WUWT TV from Germany and I’m sad that we don’t have science people like you here in Germany! Currently there are some guys trying to protect a small area of forest from being cut down to make place for a brown coal mining site near Cologne. Actually not a bad idea since there is not so much forest in the neighborhood, but those guys are given space in the media to spread their nonsence about AGW like “the current drought in the states is cause by AGW and has caused millions of victims”… Unbeliveable! And no one in the media is telling the truth after the interviews… Please keep WUWT up and running! Thank you!

  165. King of Cool says:

    Watching this from a cabin on the edge of Wallaga Lake NSW using a 4G Wifi mobile modem and a laptop and whilst the reception breaks a bit (it’s cool and it’s raining), generally it is highly watchable and it is possible to grasp the gist of each presentation.

    Congratulations and thank you for putting all this together.
    Double U – U – double U – T – TV is definitely the way of the future and brings your blog to life. Would love to see a repeat edited version of the best of the show. And the second time around will be much, much smoother.

  166. 12,000 here
    12,000,000 with Al Gore
    gives you an idea of just what a minority skepticism is!

  167. WUWT TV sounds a bit of mouthful. Perhaps you should shorten to WU TV.

  168. Robertvdl says:

    Climate will be the less of America’s problems in the near future.

    [ http://youtu.be/yaP_QTV4aWQ ]

    Soon they don’t need the climate lie any more.

  169. Stop Global Dumbing Now says:

    The ads are great!! The reverse global warming with cooltheplanetbiofuels.com pop up really added to the entertainment value of the presentation.

  170. clipe says:

    The blue line flickering is Skype?

    Watching on iPad Safari – no ads.

    Switching between BishopHill and WUWT links fixes lost connections.

    Really enjoyed Tim Ball’s presentation, but lost cnx for last 5 mins.

  171. Gail Combs says:

    For John Kehr,

    Your model for the GHE seems to explain how the placement of the continents effect the earth’s climate. Have you look at this?

  172. Gunga Din says:

    julesbollocks says:
    November 15, 2012 at 1:51 pm
    12,000 here
    12,000,000 with Al Gore
    gives you an idea of just what a minority skepticism is!

    =================================================================
    You must have missed how valueless an appeal to numbers are when it comes to what is true.
    Algore is indoctrinating the masses. (Is he a “Climate Scientist”?)
    Anthony is informing the masses.
    Which would you rather the masses be? Indoctrinated or informed?

  173. clipe says:

    Not seeing any ads using Firefox but am not using USTREAM direct link.

  174. John W says:

    NPR’s article about Al’s TV show.

    Al Gore: Most Americans Still Agree Climate Change Is Getting Worse

    http://www.npr.org/blogs/thetwo-way/2012/11/15/165221945/al-gore-most-americans-still-agree-climate-change-is-getting-worse

  175. Jimbo says:

    Hailing Al Gore, again. It’s worse than we thought!

    U.S. tornado activity near low point in modern record
    After one of the busiest years for tornadoes in 2011, tornado numbers in 2012 have come crashing down to historic lows.

    In 2011, there were 1692 twisters – second most on record. This year, only 882 tornadoes have touched down. (Tornado records date back to 1950*).

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/capital-weather-gang/post/about-face-tornado-activity-near-low-point-in-modern-record/2012/11/14/9ee31a2a-2e86-11e2-89d4-040c9330702a_blog.html

    I don’t know how much more of this dirty, filthy, rotten weather I can take.

  176. Jan says:

    I am thoroughly enjoying the presentations, Anthony. Thank you so much for bringing them to us. Think I’ve learned more today than I have in a good many years.
    You and your many talents are amazing!

  177. azleader says:

    I must be naive… I’m watch WUWT-TV on one screen and Gore’s “Dirty Weather” show on another.

    On Gore, I actually expected to see some science proving how we are inducing climate change everywhere on Earth. Literally, it has no science component to it all. Each hour starts with blanket statements and nothing more. Gore’s lack of science sticks out like a sore thumb compared to Watt’s presenters. It like the difference between night and day.

    The closest thing to “science” I’ve seen is when Gore said that human induced warming of the oceans surrounding Antarctica has allowed an unnamed and unseen species of crabs, who he says hate cold, to attack delicate defenseless unidentified species of creatures on the continent “by the millions”. No proof whatsoever… just Gore’s word!

    Its an insult to a person’s intelligence.

    The Gore presentation is big budget, controlled with mostly panel discussions, video clips and slick packaging. Gore’s boat trip to Antarctica alone probably cost more than most people make in a lifetime.

    WUWT-TV, on the other hand, is low budget with glitches. But if you want real science, then Watts is the only place you can find it.

  178. Manfred says:

    Really impressive performances. Also noteworthy how moderate and reasoned presentations are, extreme views are obviously only a property of climate alarmism.

  179. Jimbo says:

    julesbollocks says:
    November 15, 2012 at 1:51 pm

    12,000 here
    12,000,000 with Al Gore
    gives you an idea of just what a minority skepticism is!

    In science it only requires 1 person to be right for a theory (as opposed to AGW speculation) to be scrapped.

    Since you are looking at numbers have you seen recent polls regarding skepticism. No so small in the US at 35%.

    http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/10/04/climate-change-skepticism-poll_n_1939846.html

    Finally, even you must know about the media bias (BBC 28Gate etc.), ill gotten wealth of Fat Al ($100 Million) etc.

  180. Gareth says:

    Trying to watch this at 2300 ish UTC from Cambridge England. It’s breaking up and generally unreadable. The adverts seem to have full bandwidth though ;-¬
    Look forward to seeing the various presentations on Youtube.

  181. FergalR says:

    Kenjicam is awesome.

    Anthony; please do a show for an hour or two every weekday – or a longer show once a week.

  182. davidmhoffer says:

    julesbollocks says:
    November 15, 2012 at 1:51 pm
    12,000 here
    12,000,000 with Al Gore
    gives you an idea of just what a minority skepticism is!
    >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

    The longest of journeys begins with a single step. The skeptics have only just begun their journey.

  183. Jimbo says:

    Hailing Al Gore again and again. It’s worser and worser than we thought.

    “New paper finds the highest storm activity is associated with cold periods”

    http://hockeyschtick.blogspot.co.uk/2012/03/simple-disproof-of-runaway-greenhouse.html

    “We find that high storm activity occurred periodically with a frequency of about 1,500 years, closely related to cold and windy periods diagnosed earlier”

    http://www.nature.com/ngeo/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/ngeo1619.html#ref1

    h/t Hockey Schtick

  184. Jere Krischel says:

    Okay, *really* trying to watch as much as I can – *great* stuff, reminds me of the kind of in depth stuff NPR does, except without the blatant arrogant liberal bias :)

  185. Katie says:

    Maurizio’s presentation was definitely enjoyable! Great coup to tuck under his belt, and I’m glad for the rest of up that the information is out there!

  186. johanna says:

    Just watched Harold and Maurizio – both excellent and informative. BTW, when Anthony lost the picture for Harold, I could still see it.

    Boy,that Kenji is a tough critic, though – nothing seems to impress him!

  187. Manfred says:

    Famtastic Maurizo. This presentation should go around the world.

  188. Willis Eschenbach says:

    Outstanding, Anthony, very well done. Here’s an odd fact. I just did a google search for “al gore ‘dirty weather’ “.

    The first thirteen ! results were to Watts Up With That … only after those top thirteen results was there a link to Gore’s actual site.

    w.

  189. pat says:

    precious kenji should resign from UCS and start up his own Union –

    “The Union of Unconcerned Scientists”

    as expected, maurizio was interrupted by a number of ads – mostly for University of Central Queensland, which does, quite naturally, have CAGW pretensions:

    (undated, but see second linkk) CQU: Rocky hosts climate change author from USA
    American academic Dr Elizabeth Malone has been visiting Rockhampton to collaborate with CQUniversity researchers working on social networks and climate change.
    American academic Dr Elizabeth Malone has been visiting Rockhampton to collaborate with CQUniversity researchers working on social networks and climate change.
    The CQUni team is leading a $280,000 project funded by the National Climate Change Adaptation Research Facility (NCCARF)*.
    They will use ‘social networks analysis’ to understand how stakeholders communicate and share information about water resources and flooding disasters in their region.
    Dr Malone, the author of a book titled Debating Climate Change, is based at the University of Maryland’s Joint Global Change Institute…
    “Liz also spoke about the work of the Joint Global Change Institute – a partnership between the Pacific NorthWest National Laboratory and the University of Maryland – to determine whether there are any further collaborations that might be possible with research staff and/or students.”
    As part of Dr Malone’s visit, CQUniversity’s Institute for Resource Industries and Sustainability (IRIS) hosted her presentation on Sociology, Climate Change, and Integrated Research…. How to make up a career!.

    http://m.cqu.edu.au/latest-news/rocky-hosts-climate-change-author-from-usa

    CQU: Events: What’s On
    Institute for Resource Industries and Sustainability (IRIS) invites you to join them for a presentation “Sociology, Climate Change, and Integrated Research…. How to make up a career!” by visiting collaborator, Dr Elizabeth Malone, University of Maryland’s Joint Global Change Institute, United States of America.
    Time: 11:00am to 12 noon
    Date: Monday, 22nd October 2012
    This session will be recorded and can be downloaded at a later date…
    Elizabeth Malone focuses on policy-relevant sociological research in global change issues, integrating disparate worldviews, data sources, and scientific approaches. She works with a team of social scientists on behaviour and institutional change dimensions of sustainability. Malone was an author and review editor for the 2007 Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change assessment…
    She edited, with Steve Rayner, Human Choice and Climate Change, which assesses social science research relevant to global climate change. Malone holds a Ph.D. in sociology from the University of Maryland-College Park. Her book Debating Climate Change uses both discourse analysis and social network analysis to explore bases for agreement in the arguments used in the global climate change debate…

    http://www.cqu.edu.au/research/research-organisations/institutes/resource-industries-and-sustainability/events-whats-on

  190. Paul Hanlon says:

    Great show, Anthony and I’m particularly pleased to read this:

    REPLY: We can’t control these sorry, hopefully we’ll be able to use a better streaming medium than USTREAM next time -Anthony

    I’m really glad that there will be a next time, and I’m amazed at the way you put all this together. You’re right to dump USTREAM, when I went to their home page to complain about the way they raised the volume on the ads, and did not allow people to lower it, I found that they had a live stream to Gore’s channel on the home page itself. Probably how they got so many hits. Everyone going to Ustream would have been registered as a viewer.

  191. Tom in Worcester,MA,USA says:

    Great work Anthony. Any word as to whether any of this will make it to youtube?

  192. OssQss says:

    Donna’s book is a great read and truly very scary real stuff. I would highly recommend the read!

    Anthony, can you ask her who cover photo is ? Just curious :-)

  193. Mycroft says:

    Anthony watched 3 hours of the webcast and loved it had it been over a weekend would stay up and watch it all..but it’s past midnight here in the UK and work beckons all the best hope to see all presentaions on youtube
    well done, doggie biscuit for Kenji.

  194. pat says:

    for donna –

    geoffrey lean left The Independent for The Daily Telegraph in 2009, where he has continued with his CAGW advocacy ever since.

  195. Jenny Holmes says:

    Watching on and off (daytime = work) in rural Victoria, Australia via satellite connection.
    I thought Dr. Ball was great.

    Thank you, Anthony. A job well done and really worth the effort.

    JMH

  196. Kev-in-Uk says:

    Donna rocks!

  197. FergalR says:

    Please excuse me – my previous comment was ambiguous. I want WUWT broadcasts of interviews an hour or two every weekday – or a longer weekly programme. Kenjicam should be 24/7.

  198. Philip Bradley says:
    November 15, 2012 at 2:05 pm

    WUWT TV sounds a bit of mouthful. Perhaps you should shorten to WU TV.

    No good–it would be mocked as “Woo-TV”.

  199. Gail Combs says:

    I have watched a lot of the presentations.

    WOW, this was a really great idea. Most of us who hang around WUWT have bits and pieces of the story but this really putts the while story together and gives it a historical perspective too.

    Unfortunately I have notice that during the day my feed was fine but at night, when I expect that there is a lot more traffic my feed was rotten so I will wait till the , video clips are posted on YouTube. – Can’twait.

    Now if we could just make all the voters and politicians watch this ….

  200. Kev-in-Uk says:

    seriously folks – never mind the ‘dirty weather’ – what about the dirty IPCC? I knew (kind of instinctively) that the IPCC was likely a bunch of green influenced muppets, based on the type of stuff produced – but I never realised it was THAT bad. The UN has a lot to answer for – for giving this ‘panel’ any credibility at all……….

  201. PS: How about WUWT-View? (Pronounced as Woot-View.)

  202. u.k.(us) says:

    If “we” could get the glitches/ads cleaned out, and get people to watch it, CAGW would be blown out of the water.
    Very impressive.

  203. Tony McGough says:

    Finally got WUWT-TV at 24:00 GMT – the last talk, by Donna L. Perhaps too many viewing?

  204. Re: Donna Laframboise’s piece.
    It need a minute or two on the official changes the IPCC made in “Conflicts of Interest”. They acknowleged that Conflicts of Interest need to be address, but they will mostly do that after they publish the next report — two+ years hence.

  205. RoHa says:

    Billiant idea. Well done. I’ve only caught a bit of it, and it wasn’t very gripping, though. Presenter sounded like she was falling asleep. Perhaps raise the razzle-dazzle level a bit. More girls in bikinis (“This is what the IPCC says we will all be wearing in winter…) and so forth. No need to reduce the science content. The facts are still the facts when presented by lovely, curvaceous, Sandra. (“Sandra is 21 and is currently studying upper atmosphere physics at …”)

  206. @Julesbollocks, that view count at Dirty Weather is a fallacious number. Merely going to the front page of Ustream automatically starts the Gore Bore going. A couple of times I have accidentally caused an uptick in viewer number by clicking my Ustream link, and I wish there were some way to retract my viewship.

  207. How about adding a tab for Videos?

  208. I’m looking for help working on a new website: BBCgate.co.uk or 28gate.co.uk, any offers?

  209. OssQss says:

    I am curious if you were able to use the current Google Earth tool to assist in the station verification/assessment reprocessing?

  210. davidmhoffer says:

    Anthony’s voice coming through just fine but Evan’s is “warbling”.

  211. davidmhoffer says:

    Anthony’s voice coming through just fine but Evan’s is “warbling”
    >>>>>>>

    Just fine now. Love the vagaries of the internet!

  212. John Whitman says:

    To boldly go where no other independent climate blog has gone before . . . .

    Congratulations WUWT.

    John

  213. clipe says:

    Would running multiple instances of Skype sort out problems with contacting next guest in the chain?

    http://community.skype.com/t5/General-Discussion/How-can-I-run-two-Skype-accounts-on-the-same-computer-using/m-p/689917#M41348

  214. Gene Selkov says:

    I confirm the report of poor transmission by Gareth in Cambridge. I have an excellent connecton at work, so the quality of our link is not an issue. There must be a bottleneck in the middle of the path, or the streaming server itself is a bottleneck. Too many lost packets.

    Gareth: the adverts are not “live”; thery are delivered with TCP and only start playing when fully loaded.

  215. TrueNorthist says:

    Very respectable performance Mr Watts. Your hurculean efforts are very much appreciated. I join with many others in hoping you do this again soon. And my respects to Kenji the Koncerned K9.

  216. markx says:

    Anthony.

    Magnificent effort. I’ve only had time to watch a few hours here and there over the time period but found it very well presented and very interesting. (and this comes from someone who generally avoids on-line video presentations and conferences!).

    Very well done, very worthwhile and I expect the recorded videos will turn out to be a very valuable resource.

  217. On your Heat Map, last slide of the Watt’s et al paper.
    You will need to include some uncertainty analysis in the trend values for each of the regions and in the overall grid.

    Good job on the surface station paper. You need pictures for your new Class 1/2, 3, 4, 5.
    A picture of a blackened Stevenson screen would be good as well. Ironichow you came full circle on that point.

  218. _Jim says:

    Thanks guys and gals and all who made this possible!

    .

  219. Michael D Smith says:

    Very nicely done Anthony and all contributors! THANK YOU for all of your efforts.

  220. pat says:

    bravo to all who organised, participated, watched…

    managed to last the distance, and what a thoroughly enjoyable 25? hours it has been.

    time for kenji to keep watch now while u get some sleep, anthony.

  221. u.k.(us) says:

    Wow, cutting edge stuff.
    Thanks to all, for the hard work.
    I think I’ve just witnessed a new medium in the making.

  222. Neil Jordan says:

    Thank you Anthony and all the contributors. The glitches and other surprises didn’t detract from the presentation, and in fact will make it a more memorable event than that slick presentation on the other channel. I am reminded of old live TV which had memorable scenes. Julia Child’s cooking show comes to mind:

  223. Jan says:

    Just donated a small amount in the hope that you can direct it toward the purchase of some headphones that are comfortable with your hearing aids. Or . . . actually whatever else you need to keep this site and your work running.

    Thanks again, Anthony!

  224. OssQss says:

    What an enlightening 24 hrs.

    Anthony, much thanks on behalf of many who will not say it on both sides of the discussion!

    I see a brighter future for us all with the sharing that has taken place.

    There has never, in recorded history, been a culmination of such knowledge on public display in one place, period!

    I am thankful to have viewed the birth of enlightenment with respect to truth in climate science.

    That means much to many…………

    Go ahead and take the rest of the week off :-)

  225. Anthony, one point concerning your paper.

    Have you looked at separating Rural into natural habitat and agricultural area. The reason I ask is there have been a number of widespread changes in agricultural practices over your study period, such as no till farming (affects surface albedo and humidity), which potentially affect the local climate.

    D. B. Lobell, G. Bala and P. B. Duffy (2006-03-23). Biogeophysical impacts of cropland management changes on climate

    BTW, your paper should lead to a substantial downward revision to the USA temperature trend. As well as NOAA eating a large helping of humble pie. Unfortunately, what I expect is the usual evasion and excuses.

  226. Jason Salit says:

    Anthony,
    That was fantastic! Thank you for your efforts in pulling all of this together. My wife was ready to kill me dragging you and your guests all over the place playing on my iPad. But it was well worth it! Like others, I’m looking forward to the archives being posted.
    Thank you again, and congratulations!

  227. Michael Larkin says:

    Wow, the last video, on the surface stations project, knocked my socks off. As challenged as I am by the science, the point came home loud and clear. If the US surface temp anomaly from 1979 to 2008 is actually around twice too large, isn’t that a major blow for CAGW?

    I’ve watched most of the videos in your Watts-a-thon and I must say that it has helped me understand appreciably better by hanging things together more coherently. It’ll be interesting to see what kind of hit rate you get on YouTube. If I were to pick the single most comprehensive and articulate video, it would be David Evans’. I’d suggest that it be made a permanent feature, with a prominent link to it on the home page labelled something like: “Beginners–start by looking at this video.”

    Thanks for all your hard work, enthusiasm and dedication, Anthony. One day when the house of cards has finally come crashing down, I hope you get the full recognition you deserve.

  228. Bartet says:

    Anthony, I have watched as much as I can during the daylight hours from New Zealand. Have been a long-time visitor, and applaud every breakthrough that validates the authenticity and search for truth that WUWT displays. As a Christian minister that is important to me too. Climategate clinched what I had earlier discerned about the scam. Today there was lots of very good stuff. Steve M was very fast, but profoundly insightful. Maurizio was a superb David against the blustering BBC Goliath. And I admire the geniality, professionalism, and endurance of your coordination, as well as your sheer capacity. I was deeply moved by all that you do, and your sign-off mention of Bob Phelan. Barry

  229. Jeff Alberts says:

    I tried watching yesterday evening during Chris Horner’s time period (about 7:15 pm PST). The audio cut out too frequently to be useful, video was generally the same way. Frame rate for me was maybe .001 fps. I was watching from Western Washington.

    Guess I’ll have to wait for the Youtube videos *sigh* But, kudos for an excellent effort.

  230. Thanks Anthony. Good show!
    I specially enjoyed watching Donna Laframboise making the two principal points of her book, “The Delinquent Teenager Who Was Mistaken for the World’s Top Climate Expert”.

  231. Lance Wallace says:

    Blockbuster at the end of the show. Good to hear you have completed a major stage on revising the 2012 paper. Very clearly showing the NOAA homogenization process may be making things worse.

  232. Manfred says:

    One of the reasons for NOAA’s inflated temperature trend may be found in their “Quality Control, Homogeneity Testing, and Adjustment Procedures”. I think the following error is substantial and has not been investigated yet:

    http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/oa/climate/research/ushcn/ushcn.html#QUAL

    In their adjustment procedure of the link above under point 1, “suspects (> 3.5 standard deviations away from the mean) and outliers (> 5.0 standard deviations)” are identified after “validation” removed from the temperature data.

    In point 2, the temperature data are adjusted for the time-of-observation bias (Karl, et al. 1986)

    The issue is, that different times of observation with a Min-Max thermometer may cause substantially different temperature data, because there is only partial overlap of their the 24 hour measurement period. Such cases occur, if there is a substantial weather change during the combined time span of the thermometers and a maximum or minmum does not fall in the overlap.

    I checked this with hourly data from Jamestown ND (Karl used nearby Bismarck for illustration), and even differences of 10 deg Celsius are not uncommon during a year. Such cases deliver a significant contribution to the required TOBS adjustment.

    That means, however, that typical and signifcant TOBS errors may already be accounted for by step 1, and then again by step 2, that means 2 times. As TOBS lowers older temperature data, an inflated warming trend results from the double adjustment.

  233. Excellent broadcast! I was able to view or listen to more than half and enjoyed every minute!

  234. old engineer says:

    Anthony-

    As we said when I was in the Navy- “Well Done!” It was really great to put a face and voice to people whose writing I have followed. What a great job you did putting it all together. Thanks to you and all who contributed.

  235. Michael Larkin says:

    PS, Anthony, will the YouTube videos when available have their own channel? I’d think that’d be a great idea–having one place for them and any future videos.

  236. Susan S. says:

    Thank you Anthony and Presenters! I was impressed, and I hope that I will soon see the ones I missed due to real life pulling me off the net.

  237. Bob Tisdale says:

    Bravo, Anthony. A nerve-racking job well done.

  238. Poptech says:

    A well done effort by Anthony and I look forward to these being up on YouTube if possible.

    davidmhoffer, I do not know why anyone worries what Mosher has to say as he has a BA in English Literature and Philosophy. He is neither an engineer or a scientist – http://berkeleyearth.org/steven-mosher/

  239. D Böehm says:

    Poptech, interesting. Steve Mosher is a very likeable guy in person. But how could someone with such atrocious spelling, grammar and punctuation have possibly matriculated from any course with ‘English’ in the title?? If I had written like that, the gestapo-trained nuns would have rapped the back of my hand with their 3 foot wooden pointers. About twenty times! So no wonder I can spell and write correctly. Maybe Steve is the product of government schools. ☺

  240. Rex Knight says:

    I did 20 hours of it live and loved it, thank you.

  241. OssQss says:

    Hummm, I wonder what we see right in front of us with respect to climate science………

    Is it once again greed in the end? Ya think?

  242. Geoff Sharp says:

    Excellent show Anthony. Looking forward to the next one.

  243. Kelly says:

    Great job Anthony and thanks to all the outstanding speakers as well. That was truly amazing and equally informative. Thanks for all the hard work!

  244. E.M.Smith says:

    The last presentation on station quality was spectacular. Several things there where “I had a worry feeling ” are now concrete science. A heck of a lot of work, but I thank you for it!

    I’ve many times complained that at about 1987 – 1992 “something changed” and we get a big warming step function on “mod flag change”. I think I know know what it was, thanks to the program.

    In the KUSI videos, there’s a point where Peterson (sp?) says that with the MMTS conversion they detected a ‘cooling bias’ and had to correct for it. (i.e. warm the record). Then in your presentation you show that the MMTS was, in fact, more accurate and that the older Stevenson Screens when poorly maintained had a ‘warming bias’. A lightbulb went on!

    So you have artificial warming from the paint pealing and color changes on the Stevenson Screens. Along comes the MMTS that shows “things are too warm”. THAT is interpreted as a “cooling bias”, so needs “warming” to “fix” it…. Viola! You add “warming” to the already biased warm Stevenson Screen historical record. (likely via a downward adjustment of the past).

    As the FIRST measurements from those Stevenson Screens were likely correct (paint not faded yet…) moving the whole record down to adjust for the “MMTS cooling bias” is really hiding the splice error in the earliest data via changing it. Perpetually locking in a ‘splice artifact’ warming trend forever. Any testing / calibration of the MMTS can now never find that problem.

    It will happen AT the splice, that is the same point as the MMTS rollout and is same as the “mod flag change” point.

    What OUGHT to have been done was just accept the MMTS data as correct, ignore the error in the Steven Screen last data (it would show up as a step discontinuity, but since you don’t know when to remove that from the data, when the paint faded and flaked, it’s better to just admit that that step exists and is removing an error term). In that case, no “adjustment” of the MMTS “cooling bias” would be needed AND no need to make the past data cooler.

    So I think we know know why that date range has that ‘issue’. It’s the MMTS splice being handled exactly wrong.

  245. Roger Sowell says:

    Very well-done, Anthony and presenters! I missed most of it and could only watch the first and final couple of hours. I am looking forward to viewing the other 21 hours as archives.

    Re reception quality, I had good video and audio in Marina del Rey, CA, using a Sprint broadband wireless card at 3G speeds on my laptop. Browser is Chrome.

  246. pat says:

    one for Morano to add to his list:

    16 Nov: Bloomberg: Stefan Nicola: Munich’s Biggest Power Outage in Two Decades Brings City to Halt
    Munich is recovering from its biggest power failure in two decades, a blackout that affected at least 450,000 customers in Germany’s third-biggest city, halting underground trains and trapping people in elevators…
    Power supply has moved to the center of the political agenda in Germany ever since Chancellor Angela Merkel decided in March 2011 to replace nuclear reactors with clean fossil-fired plants and a growing share of renewable-energy sources. Her government has backed plans to prevent utilities including EON SE and RWE AG (RWE) from closing unprofitable power plants as the nation seeks to safeguard supply…

    http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-11-15/munich-s-biggest-power-outage-in-two-decades-brings-city-to-halt.html

  247. johanna says:

    As I posted at Bishop Hill:

    It was an awesome achievement. Considering the whole thing was done on a shoestring, with begged, borrowed (but I’m sure not stolen) equipment and assistance, a 24 hour broadcast with almost zero fluff content – except for fluffy Kenji – is a massive undertaking. Anyone who has ever put any kind of production together will know just how complicated and nerve-racking it is.

    Anthony Watts is a remarkable polymath and visionary. The final presentation, about the surface stations paper, was the icing on the cake. Does the man ever sleep?

    The Bish’s presentation was on at an uncongenial hour for Australians, but I look forward to seeing it and several others I missed when the recorded versions become available.

    Agree with Michael Larkin that David Evans’ primer was outstanding for clarity and interest, and perfect for newbies. This non-newbie learned one or two things as well, and was never bored. Jo Nova’s coda topped it off nicely.

    Having taken science blogging to a new level, it looks like Anthony Watts has just done the same for science webcasting.

  248. Mark Luedtke says:

    Congratulations for pulling this off. Well done.

  249. mrrabbit says:

    Hi Anthony!

    I’m going to try to stay as positive as is possible in my criticism – please take it as just that.

    A. Point of Origin Side

    1. Make certain that the machine responsible for delivering content to USTREAM is a dedicated machine for that purpose. If it has to run a second or third application – make certain it is a 2-4 processor or core machine.

    Otherwise starting an stopping second apps is all that is take to create point of origin jitter.

    2. If that machine has to receive other peoples content – give it a second NIC. Primary NIC is output to USTREAM – secondary NIC receives from others in the studio or remote contributory sites.

    Reason, same as reason for #1.

    3. If possible, give the primary NIC a dedicated DSL circuit that is used only for delivery to USTREAM. (I.e., that DSL circuit does not host anything…I know this is a lot to ask, but even an el-cheapo 1500/768 SBC Yahoo line can do the job.

    Reason, see 1 & 2.

    B. Yourself and Feed Contributors

    1. Join an existing USTREAM channel beforehand – listen to the USTREAM commericials. Note the audio output level – do a test broadcast and have each person including yourself tune your audio to roughly the same or close too it. Then, do not touch.

    2. Move yourself a little closer to the camera – about the same as the others did.

    3. Too many of the feed folks were sitting for all effective purposes in dungeons. Folks really need to crank that lighting up. I mean big time.

    – Poor lighting has A HUGE IMPACT ON VIDEO QUALITY EVEN FOR QUALITY WEB CAMS.
    – Poor lighting activates a default cut-out on some web cams. I.e., it cuts to a solid black tile.

    In other words, the person is still there on picture – it’s just that their webcam is giving you a solid black tile.

    C. Content

    1. I appreciate content – I love data and numbers and details. Really I do…but for a broadcast please keep the visuals simple – let the presenter cover the devil in the details with audio.

    2. Let the “Did You Know” slides show for a few seconds more each. I found it hard to keep up because when it came time to process what I was reading – BAM – slide is gone.

    3. Reduce the wording in the slides, or if absolutely necessary – accompany each slide with audio.

    D. What You Folks Did Absolutely Right

    1. Cover pregnant pauses.

    – “Did You Know” slides are perfect for that.
    – The dog.
    – Talking to the dog.
    – The dog looking at us all like a bunch of idiots. =8-)

    2. Push for forward progress in a presentation.

    Us technical people – especially though of us who are hard of hearing like myself – have a tendency to explain the same detail 3-4 times over in a different way AND oftentimes will go back and do it again later down the road. This really undermines the presentation and tires the audience. It is a very hard habit to deal with – I’ll be honest – it’s a horribly bad habit of mine.

    You however dealt with the habit a long time ago – and are very good at gently prodding others to do the same without coming across as confrontational or due. KUDOS!!! You are very professional in that regard.

    E. My Grading

    – Content = A+
    – Presentation = C

    Plenty of room for improvement. If you have memory, hardware, spare computer needs, let me know. I’ll see what I can dig up for you.

    You have my email…

    =8-)

  250. anna v says:

    Well done, Anthony. Watched part of it and enjoyed it like reading a book read many times :).
    It was great seeing live and listening to people whom I knew only from references. It was like a real conference.

    I hope newbies watched it, because talks were measured, not strident and informative, and it will have been an ‘aha!’ moment for some of them.

  251. Layman Lurker says:

    Well done Anthony and many thanks for your efforts. Kudos.

  252. Martin Lewitt says:

    Thanx, I look forward to seeing the parts I missed on youtube!

  253. daviditron says:

    Great presentations! Loved the David Evans and Roy Spencer presentations.

    I’ve always admired Anthony for many things. As an aside to the content of the broadcast, watching him calmly troubleshoot the live broadcast was wonderful. I enjoyed seeing his patience and problem solving in real time!

    Thanks for everything you and the presenters have been doing to educate and inspire us to keep asking questions.

    Dave Aschim

  254. The point that Evans made about increasing albedo of Stevenson screens as they age causing warmer temperatures inside the screen was very telling.

    We may in the end find that that the world spent north of a trillion dollars because people didn’t bother to paint the screens regularly.

  255. Correction: Decreasing albedo

  256. Stephen Wilde says:

    “The point that Evans made about decreasing albedo of Stevenson screens as they age causing warmer temperatures inside the screen was very telling.”

    Back in the 1960 s when I considered installing a Met Office Standard recording station at home I recall that one of the parameters which put me off was that they insisted on periodic repainting to a thoroughly specified standard so as to keep the thermal characteristics of the Screen itself as stable as possible.

    Their own standards do not seem to have been complied with by the professionals themselves.

    Someone should dig up a copy of the specifications for compliant sites at that time and have a look at how well (or not) they were actually applied.

    I suspect that the maintenance of site standards since then has been abysmal.

  257. Mike Jowsey says:

    mrrabbit says:
    November 15, 2012 at 8:12 pm
    Agree wholeheartedly. Content A+, presentation C+. Well said, Rabbitman.

    I would only add this: Haven’t seen Gore’s mega-production yet (tried, but it was overwhelmed and I was underwhelmed by that). However I think he will be very short on substance and very long on emotive video and deceiving graphics. But it will be SLICK. Now, as a juxtaposition, WUWT broadcast will be full of boring, dreary scientists underwhelmingly delivering the same old tried and tested absolute hypothesis annulment. Which needs a little Sizzle, n’est pas?

    Big ups for sticking it to them. Donation in the pipe.

  258. accordionsrule says:

    suffering from Kenji withdrawal:-(

  259. Jim Masterson says:

    Good job Anthony. The annoying ads didn’t detract from the presentation too much. I only saw a few items, but what I did watch was well worth the time.

    Jim

  260. notwise says:

    Anthony. Don’t usually send replies but for you, I make an exception. The effort that went into the whole affair was justified by the result. Wonderful job! I thank you.

  261. Eyal Porat says:

    Thank you Anthony for this great project!
    I watched as much as I could (time differenced) and almost all of it was informative and understandable. Not even the technological glitches spoiled the fun.
    It left me with a feeling of “More”.
    May I suggest you consider making short video blog posts as well as the written ones and upload them to YouTube or on your server (I know many people do this already).
    You certainly have what it takes and seeing all those people we only read about really make a difference.
    Well done!
    Eyal.

  262. Stephen Wilde says:
    November 15, 2012 at 9:19 pm

    Back in the 1960 s when I considered installing a Met Office Standard recording station at home I recall that one of the parameters which put me off was that they insisted on periodic repainting to a thoroughly specified standard so as to keep the thermal characteristics of the Screen itself as stable as possible.

    Then they were clearly aware of the problem well before the whole AGW bandwagon got rolling. Which makes it even more unforgiveable that they didn’t properly deal with it.

    This is the first time I ever heard this (decreasing albedo of older screens). Yet it is obvious when pointed out. I recall seeing at least one Stevenson screen with peeling paint.

  263. RoHa says:

    So when is the next broadcast?

  264. Scarface says:

    Thanks for another great effort! The graphs and presentations will be very usefull in the coming months, if not years. Thank you so much for all your time and persistence.

  265. Richards in Vancouver says:

    Overall excellent, Anthony. You sequenced the presenters well, giving a very nice rhythm to the show. And it was good to see faces to these great names — and not just faces, but enthusiastic faces of these people explaining the work they do and love. It shone.

    Yes, there were glitches, but I suspect they’ll bother you more than they bothered us. Most of the glitches were at our end anyway — the vagaries of location, our own machines, and so on. At best it was great, and I’m in that camp. But at worst it was a great teaser for the upcoming You Tube version. Now that’s not too shabby, is it?

    Now a stock market tip to fund your next production: buy shares in Kleenex! Thousands of people will be sending boxes of Kleenex to Monckton. There’s gold in that thar nose!

  266. Peter the Dachshund says:

    Where’s Kenji gone?

    I haven’t anybody to bark at this morning….

    I’ll just have to bone up on boring old ‘climate change’ again, I suppose

  267. Josh says:

    I watched most of the working day here in the UK and apart from the odd drop in connection I thought the broadcast was brilliant. What was especially good was that the outstanding speakers had lots of time to talk instead of the usual 30 second soundbites. Thank you Anthony!

  268. Cloud 10 says:

    Well done to all…a great success.

    Anthony you made great anchor man, cool under pressure with useful questions always while driving the teknics at the same time. We’re they hosing you down during the breaks… I never saw a bead of sweat or hair out of place…

    An amazing achievement …we’ll done…

  269. cui bono says:

    Excellent content, Anthony. I had a problem with intermittent sound, but that’s probably my old PC.

  270. Kev-in-Uk says:

    re the headphones – I believe you can still get them – but years ago, when I was young, I helped build a radio studio and did some dj type stuff and the best headphones we found were Sennheiser lights – very light and easy to wear for a long time.

    re the whole TV effort – very well done, and I hope you have managed to have a good sleep/rest! Thanks and appreciation are due to ALL who helped and participated, but of course, mostly to Anthony, for his obvious drive to put it out there.

    We need the proper videos on youtube asap to get the message spread via the social networks!

  271. Stephen Wilde says:

    “Then they were clearly aware of the problem well before the whole AGW bandwagon got rolling. Which makes it even more unforgiveable that they didn’t properly deal with it.”

    I agree, and the specification went further.

    They designated maximum grass length below the screen and a minimum distance from it for any non grass surface. Also maximum heights AND distances for nearby vegetation with the distance having to be greater for a greater height.

    It would be good to see a copy again and compare with current sites.

    From what I have seen the site maintenance standards were abandoned long ago and might never have been adequately complied with outside UK.

    I know it was throroughly impractical for me at the time but I never thought it was impractical for the climatologists too !!

  272. dave38 says:

    I watched for most of the day and night here in the UK. What your broadcast lacked in fancy effects it more than made up for with facts I am reminded of the motto over the door to the factory of David Kirkcaldy in Southwark London “Facts not opinions”
    Facts always trump glossy “presentations”
    Well done to Anthony and all the presenters

  273. Eyal Porat says:
    November 15, 2012 at 10:47 pm

    It left me with a feeling of “More”. May I suggest you consider making short video blog posts as well as the written ones and upload them to YouTube or on your server (I know many people do this already).

    Seconded. How about monthly two-hour shows with four guests?
    Also, add a Video tab where rebroadcasts can be watched.

  274. Gail Combs says:

    E.M.Smith says:
    November 14, 2012 at 6:59 pm

    ….I think Bob Tisdale’s presentation is finally getting me to understand how ENSO works….
    _________________________________
    Agreed, but the darn sound kept cutting out so I am looking forward to watching the presentation on U-tube.

    That is what was so wonderful about these presentations I explained and put together a look at the other side of the debate in a manner most people could understand.

  275. manacker says:

    Anthony

    Great broadcast!

    Never mind the few glitches.

    I watched most of it (I’m in CET, so the time wasn’t ideal for me).

    It’ll be interesting to see what the general feecback is.

    Keep up the good work.

    Max

  276. Gail Combs says:

    GeologyJim says:
    November 14, 2012 at 10:23 pm

    ….Think about the T and CO2 curves (from ice-core data) showcased in Gore’s “An Inconvenient Truth”. Every interglacial warm period ended (i.e., persistent cooling began) when CO2 was at its highest level. Equally, every glacial period ended (i.e., warming began rapidly) when CO2 was at its lowest level.

    In face of these data, how can any sentient being conclude that CO2 is a major player in temperature history? How can any credible scientist assert that sensitivity is high and that “tipping points” exist? Billions of years of earth history show that feedbacks must be dominantly negative and that Earth is perfectly capable of moderating its own temperature and atmospheric compsition.
    _______________________________________
    If you look at the Oregon Petition many scientifically trained people HAVE looked at the evidence and agree with you. Then look at the IPCC “experts” that Donna Laframboise emphasized at the beginning of her presentation. They did not even have their degrees finished or dyed in the wool ACTIVISTS. (The presentation broke-up badly so I am waiting for the U-tube to watch the rest of it)

    It is the MSM like the BBC who are pushing this stuff down the throats of people in a real world case of brainwashing that would make Stalin proud.

  277. manacker says:

    Anthony

    Another poster has asked this question, but is any part of the broadcast going to end up on youtube?

    Max

  278. Beth Cooper says:

    Kudos, Anthony on yr great marathon effort. i particulaly enjoyed Dr Luning
    on Bond events, Maurizio Morabito on 28gate and Donna Laframboise on
    the IPCC coterie. Sorry I missed Burt Rutan.

  279. Brad R says:

    I only had time to dip into a few of the presentations, but I was quite impressed with the broadcast technically. First, I was viewing with Opera 11.64 browser on Linux, a combination which has caused many Flash video players to choke and fail — but the UStream player worked great. The video of Anthony was very smooth, with no visible jerkiness, very few dropouts, and clear audio. I’m on an erratic 1.5 Mbit/s connection, with an older PC, and I think this is the best streaming video experience I’ve seen. The Skype interviews looked like, well, Skype — a bit more choppy and with webcam video quality, but that’s what you get. I did notice a flickering horizontal bar at the bottom of Skype video images, but I didn’t see that with the direct video of Anthony, or any locally-generated graphics. So I’d say both the Tricaster and UStream are working great, and all you need now is to get more of your guests into the studio. (I know, I know, but I can dream, can’t I?)

  280. Fernando P. says:

    Great job.

    I’ve attended several online courses at Udacity, Coursera and VIU (a spanish online university) and I think that the kind of material we watched yesterday at WUWT-TV could easily be arranged in the form of a superb online ‘course for climate change’.

    Thanks for the first class science class we enjoyed from WUWT-TV.

  281. jeremyp99 says:

    manacker – read what Anthony says above!!!

    “2. In a few days, the source video clips will be posted on YouTube”

  282. Gail Combs says:

    William Sluman says:
    November 15, 2012 at 9:21 am
    … My question to ask you experts was this. If warmist believe that a future warming of 1 or 2 degrees is likely to raise global temperatures to a dangerous tipping point, wouldn’t the rise in temperature of perhaps 20C that occurs when we move from winter to summer bring about the same effect? In comparison, 1 or 2 degrees seems extremely small. Similarly, why doesn’t an exceptionally hot summer in, for eg. Europe, when temperatures are above average initiate the same effect?
    _________________________
    I know that this was answered on the livestream. However all one has to do as GeologyJim says is look at the geological record. Even during the current Ice Age we have had interglacials that were warmer link (note the temperature during the Holocene has been quite level in comparison) and the same is true if you look only at the Holocene. The earth seems to have two semi-stable conditions with the continents in the present configuration. It takes a good boot to get a change from one condition to the other and CO2 is not and can not be that boot.

    As was shown in the other presentations it is all about extracting money not science.

  283. Steve Keohane says:

    D Böehm says:November 15, 2012 at 7:20 pm
    [..]If I had written like that, the gestapo-trained nuns would have rapped the back of my hand with their 3 foot wooden pointers.

    Mere 3 foot wooden pointers? Perhaps the increased leverage from the added length made them more equivalent to the wooden foot-long ruler with the metal inserted edges…

  284. Gail Combs says:

    julesbollocks says:
    November 15, 2012 at 1:51 pm

    12,000 here
    12,000,000 with Al Gore
    gives you an idea of just what a minority skepticism is!
    ______________________________________
    And whose fault is that? Could it be the MSM like the BBC who refused do give the public both sides of the story so they are not aware there IS two sides?

    Oh and Mr Jules Bullocks, how about doing a bit of follow the money. Like the connections between Enron, BP, Shell, GE JP Morgan and Global warming , the multinationals positioned to make big bucks off the dying bodies of old people. Don’t miss the Shell/BP connection to WWF or the Standard oil (Rockefeller money) connection to Greenpeace.

  285. David Ball says:

    I am sure you were completely stressed Anthony, but it will be worth it to kick Gore’s butt in the numbers, and with a fraction of the budget !!!! Technical issues, but will certainly be better armed next time. Great job !!!

  286. While I understand why Anthony allowed Jones to present the Watt et al segment,I would recommend that in the future Anthony should do the presentation, with Jones at hand to
    fill in any info gaps. I had a difficult time listening to Jones, who jumped all over the map
    and constantly interrupted himself, and I found it hard to follow the storyline, despite
    already being familiar with the study.

  287. Gail Combs says:

    Stephen Rasey says:
    November 15, 2012 at 4:50 pm

    Re: Donna Laframboise’s piece.
    It need a minute or two on the official changes the IPCC made in “Conflicts of Interest”. They acknowleged that Conflicts of Interest need to be address, but they will mostly do that after they publish the next report — two+ years hence.
    _________________________________
    And if you believe that I have a slightly damaged bridge I want to sell.

    At this point, with forty years of indoctrination starting with the UN’s first Earth Summit in 1972, the IPCC now has an entrenched CAGW science clique to choose from.

    The BBC scandal shows just how bad the indoctrination program is.

  288. John Bills says:

    I think a few people will have had a change of heart comparing your broadcast and the slick show of Gore. Dejá vu. Nice.

  289. chris y says:

    Great job, Anthony! The presentations that I saw (about half) were excellent. The four highlights for me were:

    1) Maurizio Morabito’s presentation on 28Gate.
    2) The Surface Stations findings. Absolutely gob-smacking, and clearly a huge amount of work by you and Evan. The hat-tip to Google was particularly fun.
    3) Donna Laframbroise’s evisceration of the IPCC, done with such a pleasant tone.
    4) KenjiCam.

  290. Guam says:

    Excellent enterprise I didn’t get to watch everything looking forward to to the video releases so I can catch up on the ones I missed.

    Big thumbs up to all involved.

  291. Robert Landreth says:

    Extremely well done, I am looking forward to seeing a lot more of this. Thank you and all the speakers for their efforts. Real science will prevail over dogma.

    Robert Landreth MSc Geology, Texas Tech Univ. ’77

  292. HorshamBren says:

    Congratulations and thank you, Anthony!

    I especially enjoyed Dr Spencer’s presentation, but well done to everyone who took part in this epic event!

  293. anarchist hate machine says:

    I like when CEI introduced Frederic Bastiats ideas and what *real* (IE NON-KEYNESIAN) economics had to say about the jobs creation clap trap…it’s all about opportunity cost. Something 99.9999% of environmentalists will never grasp.

  294. Are there any official stats on the webcast?
    What I saw for WUWT-TV at the end was 16,690 total views and a current views in the range of 420-670, median about 550 over the 24 hrs. That boils down to each view with a mean duration of 47.5 minutes. Anyone with better estimates than that?

    Contrast that with the Gore-TV stats as posted by Reg. Blank at 7:14pm:
    610,000 total views at 03:14 GMT (2.25 hrs ? into broadcast), 12100 current views. You can only get there with a mean view duration of less than 3 minutes.

    Reg. Blank’s 8:30 pm update (3.5 hrs) had “coming up to 1 million”, but the current view counter was taken down. That’s 275,000 views/hr coming from less than 15,000 current viewers (judging from the current views in the previous 2 hours). So each view is just over 3 minutes on average.

    If you go by mfo’s 2:28pm post in the previous thread, 15.7 million total views in 24 hours boils down to 650,000 views/hr. The number of current viewers was taken down in the 4th hour, so we can only guess at that. Let’s give them 3X the highest count seen: 36,000 average current viewers over the 24 hrs. That’s still only 3.5 minutes a view. The fewer the current viewers, the shorter must be the duration.

    WUWT-TV: 47.5 minutes/view
    Gore-TV: ~ 3 minutes/view

  295. LRshultis says:

    Did I hear right near the end that nuclear energy is the most expensive form of energy despite all the money and promises for decades? That is just the opinion Canadian David Suzuki. Although a nuclear power plant has high capital investment and insurance and decommissioning costs over its lifetime, the cost of fuel is very low for the energy produced, giving power at a cost comparable to coal and gas, and is much more economical than wind or solar power.

  296. Stephen Richards says:

    Roger Knights says:

    November 16, 2012 at 3:13 am

    Eyal Porat says:
    November 15, 2012 at 10:47 pm

    It left me with a feeling of “More”. May I suggest you consider making short video blog posts as well as the written ones and upload them to YouTube or on your server (I know many people do this already).

    Seconded. How about monthly two-hour shows with four guests?
    Also, add a Video tab where rebroadcasts can be watched.

    Steady on lads, Anthony has to work for a living !! He’s not sponsored by Big Oil or Big Green or for that matter the ex-felon.

  297. Gunga Din says:

    Like others have said I was only able to view parts here and there and look forward to the YouTube clips.
    Perhaps, as the blog links are put on the sidebar the YouTube links could be put there with the presenter and the subject?
    My only regret is that, while I heard him at times in the background, I never actually got to see Kenji in action.
    (Though from some of the comments made so far, perhaps there wasn’t much actual action to see.8-)

  298. S Basinger says:

    WUWT-TV had much better content but the production value wasn’t nearly as good as Gore TV. I’m shocked, personally, given how many $billions the skeptics have at their fingertips as opposed to the poor CAGW folks who clearly don’t have $millions to drop on a slick 24 hour propaganda webstream.

    Oh wait.

  299. Bob Tisdale says:

    GailCombs says: “Agreed, but the darn sound kept cutting out so I am looking forward to watching the presentation on U-tube.”

    What a coincidence! I’ve already uploaded Parts 1 & 2 of my presentation:

    http://bobtisdale.wordpress.com/2012/11/16/the-natural-warming-of-the-global-oceans-videos-parts-1-2/

    Regards

  300. For fun, I was considering the proposition that each of the viewers of WUWT-TV and Gore-TV might belong to 1 of 2 populations:
    X = population with a mean view time of 1 hr. (Watchers)
    Y = population with a mean view time of T minutes. (Bots + thrashers)
    Let T = average view time for the Y population.
    Let TV = Total Views in 24 hours.
    Let CV = Current Views average over 24 hr.

    CV = X + Y
    TV = 24* (X + Y*60/T)
    Solution:
    X = CV*(60/(60-T)) – TV*(T/(24*(60-T)))
    Y = CV – X

    TV(WUWT) = 16,690 (what I remembered seeing. I could be wrong.)
    CV(WUWT) = 550 is my guess at an average in a range of 420-670 from personal observation. Until we have something better.

    TV(Gore) = 15.7 million (from mfo 02:28 prev. thread) . I cannot confirm that, but Reg. Blank above reports about million at 2.25 hours, about 10% into it.

    CV(Gore) = 9000 @ TV=300K, 1.5 hr;
    = 11200 @ TV=500K, 1.9 hr.
    = 12100 @ TV “close to a million” at 2.25 hr. from Reg. Blank above.
    Shortly after this the CV counter was taken down. So we will have to guess this by exploring a range of possible values. An important constraint here is that the three observation points give a mean view time of only 3 minutes (approx.).

    Frac_TV_X = Fraction of TV that can come from X population (1 hr mean) views.
    Frac_TV_X = X*24/TV

    First, WUWT-TV: (TV=16690, CV=550)
    If T=0.16, X=550, Y=0.4, Frac_TV_X = 0.790
    If T=1, X=548, Y=2, Frac_TV_X= 0.787
    If T=10, X=521, Y=29, Frac_TV_X = 0.749
    So 74-79% of the TV (total views) are coming from the population views with a mean 1 hr.

    Now Gore-TV: (TV = 15.7 million)
    If CV = 36000 (3 times highest known value)
    If T=0.16; X=34347; Y=1653; Frac_TV_X=0.053
    If T=1; X=25523; Y=10477; Frac_TV_X=0.039
    If T=2; X=14684; Y=21316; Frac_TV_X=0.022
    If T=3; X=3465; Y=32535; Frac_TV_X=0.005
    T>4 is not possible.
    If CV=24000, T=0.16; X=22315; Y=1685; Frac_TV_X=0.034
    If CV=50000, T=0.16; X=48385; Y=1615; Frac_TV_X=0.074
    If CV=100000, T=0.16; X=98518; Y=1482; Frac_TV_X=0.151

    Note: T=0.16 represents a viewer that is opening the stream and shutting it down in a 10 second loop. With T=0.16, X = watchers, Y = ‘bots.’

    Conclusion: X is tightly coupled with the estimate for CV. But the fraction of total views from 1-hr Watchers is illuminating. The Frac_TV_X (= 1hr people views / total views) is highest for high CV and low T. For CV = 36000 (3 time higher than any reported in the first two hours) only 5% of the total views were from “watchers”, 95% from bots. We have to use CV=100,000 (8 times higher than max observed), to reach a point where even 15% of total views could be from a population with a 1 hr mean view. At least 85% of total views were bots cycling every 10 seconds.

  301. Mr. Rasey, your idea of “fun” looks like math to me.
    I’ve got a better idea. Let’s just smooth the data. There is something wrong with a viewer that only stayed on WUWT for 10 minutes, so let’s bump them up, say, another 20 minutes to make them more in line with the data we like, i.e., the “real” viewers. Then take that number and apply it to the people who weren’t on the internet at all, but had a WUWT viewer nearby.
    OMG, half the world watches WUWT!! It’s worse than we thought!!
    /sarc

  302. johanna says:

    Well, it seems that GoreBore viewers are mostly either bots or people with an attention span of about three minutes. Either one works for me. : )

    I think the most important outcome is that 24 hours’ worth of content which can be re-used has been generated. For example, David Evans’ brilliant tutorial is a wonderful teaching aid, both in terms of content and presentation. The same can be said of several others.

    It also provides a snapshot in history. Maurizio’s coup, just a few days old, narrated by him in compelling terms; Anthony and Evan explaining the evolution of what will be a landmark paper; several presentations which summarise “the story so far” on various issues.

    The fact that the UCS representative was unimpressed by any of it is a good sign. Kenji was the perfect standard-bearer for that organisation, especially its Ethics Committee, which he should be appointed to immediately. I don’t think that sleeping through meetings will be any problem – on the contrary, it would be an advantage.

    An outstanding achievement.

  303. bcbrowser says:

    Just adding to the many voices above. Thank you Anthony for the hard work. If these guys ever win it wouldn’t be the first time some dogmatic “prophet” defeated reason and plunged the society into years of misery.

  304. TonyM says:

    Well done Anthony, congratulations. What a herculean effort!
    Best wishes from down under Oz.

  305. Kev-in-Uk says:

    Re possible TV efforts – I hope a good streaming source can be found without excessive ads?
    I’m not really up to speed with the techy stuff – but can a skype ‘stream’ be picked up by several (hundred?) viewers at once? conference calling if you will? The return stream would only need to be audio from the audience to enable them to ask questions (though typed comments might be easier?) I dunno, is there not some cheap ‘platform’ out there in cyber space for this purpose?
    I am quite keen to see some form of open video style/based debate/presentations if possible. The quality doesn’t need to be goresque (or should that be gory!) but enough for us to ‘get together’ and thrash through some stuff? What do you think? Is anything like this possible?

Comments are closed.