Voting closed TODAY Jan 13 at 5PM Eastern, 2PM Pacific time.
Preliminary ending numbers are available here
Thanks to everyone who participated. The results won’t be final until reviewed by the judges/operators. Now back to our regularly scheduled programming. – Anthony
WALLY (14:27:26)–
You are the man (woman?) You have summarized the most rational status of the science and public policy implications. It’s my hope that millions of taxpayers and voters show your good judgment and rebel against ideological alarmists, cargo cultists and financial manipulators who are looking for us to subsidize their carbon trading schemes. Cheers.
Nichole – ouch, you hurt me! Inaction is exactly the right policy right now. Just as there is no evidence that directly ties manmade CO2 to any of the more recent warming, there is no indication that throwing massive amounts of capital at it will change a thing. The climate is changing, always has, always will. It is beyond arrogant to believe that we can make any dent in that at all. Show me any real science that supports your ‘action is better than inaction’ argument. So far, you have presented nothing scientific to back any claims made. You are content to bash me as unscientific but you have yet to present one verifiable fact on this blog. I can tell you as a peer-reviewed, published scientist and a reviewer that peer review does not guarantee sound science. Reviewers are tasked with looking at methodology and presentation, most are outside of their own areas of expertise to try to keep professional bias out of it. Peer review does not say anything about the conclusions drawn in the publication, only the methodology and presentation to get there. Often, there is better review in the public domain.
Benjamin P. – yes, CO2 is a powerful GHG but when you look at the spectrum of GHGs, water vapor is by far and away the most powerful and prevelant of the GHGs. So it seems reasonable that if we are to control GHG emissions, it would make more sense to try to control water vapor which mankind emits right along side CO2. Why not? Because CO2 is directly tied to energy consumption. The real agenda is about control of energy. not GHGs. Listen to Hansen’s rants sometime about the evil coal plants and SUVs. Robert Austin touched on it but did not quite put out the full picture. The GHG effect of CO2 is non linear but logarithmic, meaning that there must be a 10 fold increase in concentration for the same absorption affect. ie a 50 to 100 ppm increase in CO2 (doubling) will yield and X change in temperature. For that same X change, the next change in CO2 concentration must be from 100 to 1000 ppm. So you can see why doubling and doubling again of CO2 will not affect global temperature significantly. We have already reach the saturation effect of CO2 or near to it. It is of course more complex than that but you get the point.
A simple lesson here is anytime someone yells “its the end of the world” especially when based on computer models, you should – without fail – question them.
As of yet, I have had no one pick up the challenge of my last post.
God bless,
bwana
PS: congratulations to Anthony and all of your regular WUWT contributors.
Wuwt, looks like you wonDD
What happened to whining about how MEEEEN all those nasty atheists over on Pharyngula are?
Voting done. No time left, no hanging chads, no Minnesotan recounts.
Done! Congratulations Anthony and WUWT crew for jobs well done!!!
Mondo
Like any Criminal justice system, there is no justice unless there a cops to enforce the law. That means breaking into buildings arresting bad guys, smashing their meth labs and sometimes shooting and killing them if they shoot back at you. If you’d like an example of what happens to the “World Order” when Western countries rely on isolationism and World Court decrees you only have to go back to Europe in the 1930’s and 1940’s. The cost in human lives was much greater than that of Iraq and the benefits of a democratic counterbalance to the Facism of Iran will be great and only fully realized in the future. I don’t see any other countries in this world stopping the genocides around the world if the US does not lead the way.
Speaking to the wisdom of crowds:
The reason why they Alarmists are losing the debate isn’t so much the science. There are plenty of concerned citizens who want to be part of feel good solutions, or who don’t understand and will believe what they are told without knowing the difference between science and consensus, etc.
But what the Average Joe is taking to account in his daily actions, is the urgency of the alleged crisis. When you’ve got the IPCC talking about New York being underwater, and then repeatedly and grossly downgrading the scenarios, while Average Joe can look at the Hudson river and see that the sea level in New York harbor has not changed appreciably at any point in his memory, he quickly tires of the whole debate.
Urgency matters, and there is no credible urgency with respect to climate. Meanwhile there is a very obvious and credible urgency to massive cap and trade impacts to the current difficult economy, and to policies that will drive current energy prices. These clear and present problems actually land on the radar of Average Joe, as they should.
But there’s just not enough real or even fake climate disaster evidence for Average Joe to feel threatened, no matter how many news specials NBC films live from Antarctica. The Alarmist crowd should give up on this basis alone. But they never seem to grasp that moment of introspection when Ehrlichian doomsday prediction after doomsday prediction never materializes.
Anthony,
As I was in the midst of my diatribe I forgot:
Congrats! I have been reading for about a year and have found a lot of useful information. At somepoint this summer I am going to try to do some reconnoitering of the TX Gulfcoast weather stations for you. You are truly a scholar and gentleman.
God bless,
bwana
President-elect Barrack Obama’s nominee for Energy secretary, Steven Chu, walked a fine line today between his strong views on the need to combat climate change and the concern of some senators about Chu’s past criticism of coal use, endorsement of gasoline taxes and tepid embrace of a cap-and-trade system for limiting greenhouse gas emissions.
Anthony, congratulations from the Netherlands. This whole day I asked, everywhere my works brought me today, to use their internet for voting WUWT!
Well done Anthony-a great site peopled by- on the whole-well mannered bloggers. A refreshing chamge from some of the vitriolic sites on the web.
Its great to see some warmists here as well so as to get a different view point-they are the grit in the oyster.
TonyB
Congratulations from Japan.
Anthony, congratulations on the win, you are a service to the world community and an example of how to run a no nonsense, high signal to noise ratio blog.
It is a pleasure to read the posts here, and I have started checking here on a daily basis to see what is going on.
Likewise to all the accumulated contributions from all who post here, the award is well deserved and I am sure will increase your daily hits as more people discover they can get information at WUWT without drowning in a political agenda.
Larry
Take a bow Anthony…
Gio-
It looks as if my previous post missed the link…
http://giovanniworld.wordpress.com/2009/01/13/pissing-off-an-ecofascist/
Gio-
Nichole,
Hope you stay around for awhile. You may go through the same kind of breakthrough that many regulars here have already experienced. Your use of “wtf” is exactly what I experienced when I first discovered the alarmists were lying. With me the initial discovery was that temperature did NOT follow CO2, in fact, historically it was just the opposite. My thought process was “if CAGW is true then why do the adherents need to lie in order to make their case”.
So, I started looking at all the hype and low and behold I found lie after lie after lie. WTF!!!!!! The polar bears are doing fine, the arctic ice extents appears to have been lower 80 years ago when CLIMATOLIGISTs of the time found open waters further north than today. The temperature record keeps getting modified by those who started the CAGW scare and amazingly the warming trend keeps going up because past temperatures are lowered (no shite). Not only that, the data and methods are kept private by government scientists.
So, stay around and just maybe you will get to say “wtf” many more times.
PS. Congrats to WUWT. Thank you for all your hard work.
Congratulations. This blog is compulsive reading. I sometimes wonder where you find the time for it! Keep up the good work.
Congratulations.
@BarryW (14:24:11) :
Actually, IIRC it was Alfred Wegener on continental drift.
Congrats to Watts!
I don’t know, over the years I’ve somehow developed the possible rationalization that its make enough sense to beat the opposition only because they want to beat you so badly, especially when it involves contest which perhaps doesn’t really prove anything lasting.
But since AGWer’s allegedly don’t put much stock in public opinion polls – apart from the one which shows that there is probably a consensus about a consensus on AGW – I suppose they are not too bothered by their defeat.
It wuz the Sun wot won it!
(UK readers will get the gist).
Well done Anthony.
Anthony.
Congrats. thanks for the education.
Aaron (15:03:37) :
What happened to whining about how MEEEEN all those nasty atheists over on Pharyngula are?
I’m an atheist, and I think that Pharyngula is an embarrassment. I sincerely hope that WUWT has won.
We are assuming you have won (we hope)? Is it confirmed?
REPLY: Thursday morning final results will be announced – Anthony