Al Gore's USTREAM viewership is as inflated as his 'science'

Last week on November 14th and 15th, former vice president Al Gore’s Climate Reality Project let loose with another “24 hours of Climate Reality” in a global TV webcast hosted on USTREAM. The emphasis this year was in trying to make connections between energy use and weather events with the theme being “dirty energy=dirty weather”.

While there’s probably a dirty joke in there somewhere, Gore as usual took anecdotal events such as hurricane Sandy and tried to connect weather and climate with leaps of scientific certitude such as “In fact, all weather events are now effected by global warming pollution.” in a recent Guardian interview.  Just a few years ago, attempts to connect weather and climate were laughed at by the global warming crowd and they used the oft repeated maxim “weather is not climate”.

Contrary to Mr. Gore’s claims is a recent editorial published by the editors of Nature, arguably the world’s most influential scientific journal. That editorial came down hard on attempts such as Mr. Gore’s to link weather events to climate change with this declaration:

Better models are needed before exceptional events can be reliably linked to global warming.

Despite that drawing of scientific line in the sand almost two months before his broadcast, Mr. Gore and his activists didn’t blink an eye at making hurricane Sandy the most recent poster child for climate change, much like Mr. Gore did for hurricane Katrina.

During his “dirty weather” broadcast, Mr. Gore and his team of activists repeatedly tried to convince viewers that energy use is directly tied to weather events such as hurricane Sandy. The logic used is that warmer temperatures produce more frequent and more intense hurricanes.

The reality is that the United States has been in a “hurricane drought”. The last major hurricane (Category 3 or greater) to  make a landfall on the USA  was hurricane Wilma on October 24th, 2005. That’s over seven years since a major hurricane has hit the USA. Sandy wasn’t even a hurricane when it made landfall, as it had been downgraded to an extratropical cyclone by the National Hurricane Center.

The science and the numbers don’t support Mr. Gore’s assertions yet he presses on with his inflated issue, completely sure that weather events and climate are inextricably connected. Mr. Gore is no stranger to inflating issues like this as his movie An Inconvenient Truth has been demonstrated to contain many such inflated issues, with a judge in England ruling in 2007 that the film contained at least nine factual errors, making it unsuitable for showing in public schools there.

So given that history, the latest revelation about Mr. Gore’s Climate Reality Project isn’t much of a surprise.

Last week, the viewer numbers for his webcast seemed to soar quickly to incredible heights as seen in this screen capture of the broadcast, note the value of 16M circled in red:

Screencap courtesy Dana Nuccitelli and Tamino’s “Open Mind”

That 16 million figure is the views counter for the channel at USTREAM. Mr. Gore and his supporters have claimed these millions of visits represent a success for the broadcast.

But, like with Mr. Gore’s other claims, it folds easily with the slightest scrutiny.

The data gathered from the broadcast doesn’t support  the 16 million viewer total. As analyzed by a telecommunications expert it suggests the final number might be inflated, especially since the Gore team apparently had the “current viewers” count removed from the USTREAM video player, leaving only the total views count. If you look at any other USTREAM live feed, you’ll see two sets of numbers, representing current and total viewers. The current viewers count on Mr. Gore’s channel remained in the 10,000-12,000 range during the part of his broadcast where that number was available. The question is, why would they need to remove the “current viewers” counter mid broadcast?

A second independent analysis of the data suggests that some electronic virtual viewers were involved, concluding from a mathematical analysis of the numbers that “At least 85% of total views were bots cycling every 10 seconds.”.

And there’s more, the Internet traffic reporting website Alexa has monitored USTREAM since its inception, logging the visits. Surprisingly, there’s no traffic blip visible on Alexa from Mr. Gore’s event on November 14-15. Traffic rank actually went down during that 24 hour period.

According to a Techcrunch article on USTREAM’s success from March 17th 2011, their biggest day ever was during the Japanese earthquake:

On just the day of the quake Ustream hit 7.2 million views due to all of us who were glued to the stunning and terrifying imagery on the streams, an audience greater than Sheen’s antics and greater than those who watched the Chilean miner rescue.

And that blip of traffic the article refers to from the March 11 2011 Tōhoku earthquake is clearly visible in Alexa’s traffic stats for USTREAM then:

So with a claimed 16 million views for his latest global telecast, why doesn’t Mr. Gore’s “dirty weather report” show up as an even bigger traffic spike on the far right or in the magnified graph above? For that matter, where’s the traffic spike from September 15th of last year on USTREAM where Mr. Gore claimed 8.6 million views? It should be there and be even bigger than USTREAM’s best day ever of 7.2 million views, shouldn’t it? Readers may recall our own “Charles the Moderator” did a takedown of Gore’s USTREAM numbers last year.

And, if USTREAM had a new record day with 16 million views, more than doubling their previous record traffic day of March 11, 2011, don’t you think they would be saying something about it? So far, not a peep.

I suppose it is a matter of whose “reality” you believe, but it seems clear to me that the numbers outside of Mr. Gore’s reality don’t even remotely support his version of it. Readers may recall that Mr. Gore is no stranger to manufacturing his own version of science reality, and sadly it seems his viewership claims are as inflated as his ‘science’.

0 0 votes
Article Rating

Discover more from Watts Up With That?

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

74 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
November 19, 2012 10:00 am

I would really be interested in seeing the unique viewer counts. That will tell a tale of its own.

milodonharlani
November 19, 2012 10:01 am

Looks as if my guess of 15,000 human viewers for Gore’s lieathon was too high.

Edohiguma
November 19, 2012 10:02 am

The 10,000 to 20,000 should be a really good estimate. Over 24 hours there could certainly be millions of viewers (though unlikely), but that puts up the question how many of them were returning viewers anyway. I’m 100% that there weren’t all new IPs connecting and that most were returning viewers.
That’s how streaming goes. I’ve been involved with Clint Hackleman from Myndflame, who broadcasts his entertainment every day, so I know one or two things about streaming and everything I’ve learned from Clint tells me that Crazy Old Al is pulling off some hyperinflation with this.

RHS
November 19, 2012 10:08 am

Cool, Gore invented his own fan club where he is chief cook and bottle washer!

Kurt in Switzerland
November 19, 2012 10:08 am

Another Josh cartoon in the making!
Hoping Delingpole will get something on this in the Telegraph…
Kurt in Switzerland

Don Worley
November 19, 2012 10:10 am

My mother taught me not to make fun of the disabled, so I have nothing to say.

Mike Lewis
November 19, 2012 10:17 am

What else do you expect from a career politician, and not a very good one at that? As the old joke goes, “How do you know when a politician is lying? Their lips are moving.” Just like with climate science, it’s all about fudging the numbers to achieve a desired goal. It’s not about science any longer. It would just be sad if it wasn’t for the fact that billions of dollars are being “wasted” to support the green industry when those same billions could be going for research that would actually save lives and potentially create a better world. Al Gore should be ashamed of himself but he’s shameless. /rant

Roger Knights
November 19, 2012 10:23 am

Puffed up.

Kev-in-Uk
November 19, 2012 10:23 am

Jeesh – I’d like to see the ‘explanation’ from the warmists! but I will never give any traffic to those morons at RC, etc. The complicit lying just gets worse and worse. have they absolutely no shame?

November 19, 2012 10:24 am

My guess is they are counting the indivudual neurons on each of his viewers.

Jimbo
November 19, 2012 10:27 am

“In fact, all weather events are now effected by global warming pollution.”

Can anyone spot the solar panels and wind turbines in Gore’s new home with 6 fireplaces?
http://directorblue.blogspot.de/2010/05/exclusive-estimate-carbon-footprint-of.html
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/05/17/photos-al-goree-new-8875_n_579286.html#s91230
Like the inflated Al Gore he just can’t help hyper inflating global warming.

November 19, 2012 10:27 am

There’s a Mother Nature News blog post on the topic that has to be the stupidest ever written.

November 19, 2012 10:28 am

“Effected” or “Affected” ? Is his English as bad as his science, or did her really mean to say that? There’s a big difference in the magnitude of the lie.
Looks like Google is confused on this point too:
http://img32.imageshack.us/img32/210/picture3oae.png

November 19, 2012 10:30 am

“he” not “her”

Skiphil
November 19, 2012 10:31 am

Speaking of inflated Alarmist b.s. numbers, the McKibben site is claiming that 72% of Harvard undergrads have “voted” in favor of having the Harvard $30 billion endowment “divested” from evil fossil fuel interests:
http://350.org/en/media/harvard-vote
(h/t Tom Nelson)
I suspect that participation was skewed by activist interest, but in any case such votes or polls serve only to suggest how widespread greenie irrationality is among the self-styled pompous “best and brightest” (sic)

davidmhoffer
November 19, 2012 10:31 am

Well, you can’t use the raw data, everyone knows you have to use the “adjusted” data 😉
…and no…. you can’t see the data or the methods used, you’ll just try and prove them wrong….

November 19, 2012 10:32 am

Alan Watt, Climate Denialist Level 7 says:
November 19, 2012 at 10:24 am

My guess is they are counting the indivudual neurons on each of his viewers.

Three?

November 19, 2012 10:42 am

henry@timemagazine
In the wake of Sandy, Michael Grunwald tells readers that scientists like me who studied the data from weather stations and come to the conclusion that there is no man made climate change, are just like Lance Armstrong. (Sandy ends the Silence , Time, Nov 19, 2012)
This is a very serious allegation, and I hope that Time Magazine will give at least one of these scientists an opportunity to respond.
I am concerned that the correct science is not coming over in the media and that the public is being lied to, to protect certain beliefs and interests.
First, can I just explain that Sandy was not due to or caused by “global warming”. In fact, it is quite the opposite. Remember from your schooldays that (more) clouds and (more) condensation are formed when water vapour cools(more)? It is the global cooling that is now causing some extra weather events.
You will see this soon also being confirmed by much harsher winters.
2nd, can I just point out that it has not been warming for about 16 years.
From my own dataset and others it can be shown that we cooled by at least –0.1 degree from the beginning of this century,
e.g. see here;
http://www.woodfortrees.org/plot/hadcrut4gl/from:2002/to:2012/plot/hadcrut4gl/from:2002/to:2012/trend/plot/hadcrut3vgl/from:2002/to:2012/plot/hadcrut3vgl/from:2002/to:2012/trend
3rd\, there is ample evidence to suggest that 90 years ago the situation in the arctic was exactly the same as now
e.g.
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2008/03/16/you-ask-i-provide-november-2nd-1922-arctic-ocean-getting-warm-seals-vanish-and-icebergs-melt/
By 1950 all the molten arctic ice as reported in 1923 was frozen up again. My results show that in 2 or 3 decades from now, the lost ice on the arctic will also all be back.
Recent reports show that the Antarctic has already gained more ice.
My analysis of global maximum temperatures shows that we are now exactly as we were about 90 years ago:
http://blogs.24.com/henryp/2012/10/02/best-sine-wave-fit-for-the-drop-in-global-maximum-temperatures/
The above graph clearly shows that global cooling has now started and will accelerate significantly.
So, please don’t worry about the carbon. Start worrying (a bit) about the coming common cold…
Lastly, I want to warn Time and its readers in the USA that they’d better be prepared.
New York: take some lessons from The Netherlands on how to stop flooding.
(e.g. you can verify my story by asking your tomatoes farmers in Anchorage about the reasons as to their failed crops? Lots more of those stories to come…..)

malrrob
November 19, 2012 10:48 am

What would the advertisers think of this especially of they are being charged according to viewer count.

Manfred
November 19, 2012 10:55 am

He passes from the implausible to the irrelevant. Manufactured numbers, smoke and mirrors – it’s the usual line-up – self-promotion, dressed up as politics masquerading as altruism.

John R T
November 19, 2012 11:04 am

Don Worley Nov 19, 2012 at 10:10 am
My mother taught me not to make fun of the disabled, so I have nothing to say.
—–
Yep, and “All hat; no cattle.”
Do not point, nor stare: Un-common; hardly rare.

November 19, 2012 11:07 am

I smell advertiser fraud – they are bilking the Ad people at the higher rate. No wonder he can afford a new multi-million dollar dirty house on the beach.

Stevec
November 19, 2012 11:21 am

Isn’t Al on Apple’s Board of Directors?

beesaman
November 19, 2012 11:24 am

Upstream should be able to provide the real data…

Will Nelson
November 19, 2012 11:45 am

Edohiguma says:
November 19, 2012 at 10:02 am
The math is probably not this simple but it seems like with even 10-20,000 viewers the average view time is less than 1-2 minutes.

1 2 3