The hits just keep on coming. 1,672,437 page views this month, up from 1,478,801 page views in March.
After posting last months stats, there was some discontent by some angry and somewhat incredulous bloggers that it might be an April Fools joke of some sorts. Sorry, no such luck.
But what was humorous, was one particular blogger (Joe Romm) who said:
It is absurd to publish one’s page views to 7 significant digits without caveats — even 2 is stretching it.
I got a huge chuckle out of that. So just to show that the stats are indeed real, and accurate down to that 7th digit (since they come from the WordPress internal traffic counter), I’m expanding this month’s report.
Joe, this report’s for you. Here is a screencap showing my WordPress internal report page, with all 7 digits, sans caveats. No caveats are needed since the WordPress numbers are actual, not estimated, and not drawn from router statistics.
Maybe Joe will reciprocate and post a screencap his own internal stats page.
The graph on this page above differs a bit from the headline graph (which is graphically edited to move the title inwards and downwards to fit nicely on the page) because it was snapped after 00GMT (5PM PST) and it shows the new month of May stats also, which are of course quite low by comparison.
So the numbers are real, from WordPress.com (where my blog is hosted) and exact to the 7th digit, despite angry accusations otherwise.
In that blog post, Joe Romm also showed an Alexa graph to prove his point, saying:
Interestingly, there is one independent source that suggests Watts’ page views and mine are in fact the same (and hence possibly around 1.4 million). If you go to the Web traffic ranking and comparison site Alexa, go to page views, and type in wattsupwiththat.com, you’ll get this graph:
So at best I am just negating the disinformation Watts is spreading. Sigh. And lest there be any doubt, WattsUpWithThat is in fact an extremist anti-scientific denialist website, as his recent posts make clear.
Gosh, all that angry prose from a traffic report? I don’t much care whether WUWT beats Climate Progress in traffic or vice versa, but I do care when the proprietor suggests that by printing my own internal stats page I’m spreading disinformation. Of course, I don’t expect an apology, but I wanted WUWT readers to know.
OK, following Joe’s lead, lets look at Alexa this month.
Pageviews: we are still about the same in April according to Alexa.
Though over the longer 6 month term, WUWT is slow and steady while Climate Progress runs hot and cold.
Joe didn’t show the other interesting comparative statistics from Alexa though, so I thought WUWT readers might enjoy seeing them.
Here is Traffic Rank over 6 months:
And here is Reach:
But having been labeled a “spreader of disinformation”, please, don’t take my word for it, visit Alexa and see for yourselves. Here is the link.
Some people might wonder why I post my web stats each month. Some might say I’m tooting my own horn, well maybe a bit, I’m admittedly proud of WUWT.
But there’s a bigger reason. WUWT has thousands of visitors, many of whom are regulars who see this blog as something they relate to and grow with. Many visit daily or even more often. There’s a sense of pride and ownership with all of you, too. Without its readers, content contributors, and those tireless volunteer moderators that keep the snark under control, WUWT would be nothing. I try not to lose sight of that. This is my monthly reminder to myself that this is a team effort.
As this blog expands its reach, it seems only fair that my readers also get to share in seeing the growth. I listen to my readers, who are often more insightful than I am, and they offer wonderful suggestions and topics.
I thank you all for making WUWT one of top science blogs on the Internet today.
And thanks to you to Joe, for bringing up this topic last month.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
I have devised a computer model to model the rise in extremist anti-scientific denialism.
In accordance with some well know authorities on the subject, the model assumes that such a rise is directly coupled with hits on the famous http://wattsupwiththat.com/ site.
After 100 individual runs of the model, in which an ever increasing rise in hits on the famous http://wattsupwiththat.com/ site, it was found that the initial assumption was in fact “true” each and every time. The fact that all my computer model runs agree with the initial assumed premise have convinced me that the assumption is in fact correct.
The use of such self-referential logic is very much esteemed by the successful practioners of climate modelling, and I would happily recommend it to anyone who is interested in proving their assumptions to be correct.
REPLY: You neglected to factor in feedback. We get feedback here daily. – Anthony
The masses are waking up… keep up the good word… the debate is just beginning.
Unscientifically based on how darned cold it’s been at my house the last couple years and the fact that my garden just doesn’t grow like it used to for lack of sunshine, I think I’m rapidly moving beyond skeptic to denialist…..
BTW, merchandising is only tawdry when you have obnoxious neon ads flashing distractingly and you constantly push your wares to the detriment of the rest of your site. A nice, discreet button that links to a site where we could by a product if we choose to do so, would be fine IMHO.
“Skeptic is the label of choice. – Anthony”
How about realist vs alarmist?
“..mainstream science is on the verge of being overturned by the efforts of a group of dedicated amateurs” (The Australian Financial Review, April 23)
Congrats Anthony, Steve, McIntyre and many others 🙂
“Too bad #1 science blog WUWT can’t be more factual like #2 Pharyngula…”
Uh…sure. Going to Pharyngula for facts on any science-related matter is a mistake.
It’s borderline amusing to see WUWT introducted as an “extremist anti-scientific denialist website” right off the bat — sort of like being introduced every time as a “silly-pants doodyhead.” The speaker instantaneously comes off as more absurd than the target.
Congrats again, Anthony!
I’m very glad that 1) you created and maintain WUWT, and 2) that I found it early on. I’ve sent innumerable people here, and visit several times a day to keep up. The other day I noticed the owner of my company was browsing around, too, which made me smile.
Personally I’ve cut my commenting back a bit lately since, well, there are others with more important contributions. Also I tend to be very impatient with stupid people. Although I’ve never been “snipped”, I’ve had my fingers slapped a few times so… yeah, I keep that tendency under control.
As others have said, the atmosphere here is polite and pleasant, and that IS because of the moderating. I have little doubt that is the reason people come back and bring their friends. There is much to learn and so little of importance in the mainstream media (who CARES what Tom Cruise is doing???) Even some of the throwaway comments I see on WUWT lead me in directions I never would have gone before… the other day someone posted something about the reservoir in the Ozarks that failed, and I (wasted) spent over an hour reading up on it and studying the pictures.
I don’t know what planet some of the rabid AGW people are living on, but here on Earth this site represents Science. I must have missed the day in school where Science was defined as steadfastly standing by a failed and disproved hypothesis. Every day that you don’t learn something new is a wasted day.
I’d love to take all the credit for the traffic as I have a link on my own web-page.
But I have only had 2000 hits in 18 months,…. drat.
Anthony, don’t overlook the multiplier effect of the number of discussions resulting from your hits score.
E.M. Smith – as John Steinbeck put it – Texas is not so much a state as a state of mind.
The idea seems to help explain some other geographical places and may also figure with WUWT
Reasons for visiting this blog:
1. Uncensored contributions, provided that threats or foul language are not used.
2. Responsiveness to user interest and queries.
3. Independence from IPCC/Govt mantras.
4. Links to other sources.
5. Specific data to address specific claims/counter claims.
6. Global contributions.
Clearly if you only read the Guardian or were an unreconstructed member of the Labour Party, you’d be taking anti-hysteria pills to keep you calm in the face of imminent armageddon. Or you should be. Or you should be relocating you and your kids to at least 200m above sea level…..and slightly further north, as clearly deserts are going to form as far north as Southern England within a short period of time……..
Mercifully I am a member of neither of those interest groups, so I visit this site, amongst others, and hold a healthy scepticism about what I am told. Because in 44 years on this earth, I can’t ever remember being spoken to respectfully as an adult by a single member of the scientific or political classes about any issue of substance. Because for them, it’s all about ‘edge’, ‘power games’ and ‘status’ via ‘controlling the masses’. Actually it’s about pathetic little spying rings, but that’s getting off topic…
But if you ever tire of this blog Mr Watts, ever thought of setting one up to discuss modern surveillance methods and how they are used against intelligent skeptics – you’d be amazed, appalled and radicalised if you did, I promise you?!
Congrats Anthony and the rest of the KCR team. Humiliy is very noble, but we all need to realize that the Alarmists got to where they are on the backs of most of us who prefer daily humility. Now is the time to loudly proclaim what real science looks like and defend ourselves from the crippling economic plots of the Alarmists.
On other more local blogs I link and reference WUWT early and often. I notice more and more commenters at such sites are becoming KCRs. Word is getting out through the MSM blockade.
Joe Romm and the Hockey Team are scared, and it shows.
Full steam ahead.
Can we see a chart of page views vs global temperature anomaly or Arctic ice?
Hey – toot your own horn all you want. No one is forced to listen.
Congratulations Anthony. Down under (Australian and New Zealand), there are a number of us directing as many people as we can to your site. We are probably making a small contribution at least.
A suggestion: With all of the existing and latent talent at WUWT, is it time to organize a team to take on the infamous, self-appointed climate change twister of the truth, William Connolley at Wikipedia?
Best wishes
Jack
You should very proud of what you`ve created here Anthony. You have singlehandedly done more than anyone on the entire planet, to bring awareness to the AGW hoax. Yes Climate Audit started it, yes the likes of Richard Lindzen, Christy etc helped. Media like Rush Limbaugh or Andrew Bolt (here in Aus) helped locally, but WUWT has done more than all of these combined to bring awareness to the world.
If the AGW hoax starts to REALLY break, and by that I mean when true stories about the hoax reach 30-40% of the volume that AGW propaganda gets in the media, then the public will start to waken en-mass. I hope you have prepared for that – because you will look forward to millions more viewers per month then. You will probably even take on blogs like Drudge, HuffPost etc.
I’ll throw one out there…. : Nobel Prize in 2013
hehe hope Andrew gets a big head !!
Rhys,
I think you’re painting with an overbroad brush on the question of scientists and respect. I have received many kind and thoughtful replies from scientists who subscribe to AGW (but not in its catastrophic form).
The people who you’re really railing at are offensive, arrogant and abusive – but they are a very small fraction of a percentage of scientists in general. I would estimate that perhaps 30-40 of these individuals are causing 95% of the hot air in global warming. They have the attention of the media for the moment (although that is waning as the climate cools).
In ten years or less, everyone will wonder what the fuss was about.
I hope this page reaches 10 million and becomes the Drudge Report of Climate and Weather.
This is an amazing blog indeed.
Who needs the main stream media?
The way things are going, this site may hit a tipping point leading to runaway readership and BE mainstream media.
what are you doing up evan?
Jack,
I think you are over-rating that bozo at Wiki.
I don’t think that many people are fooled by his shenanigans
and he’s just a bit player on the subject.
Believe me, this guy is not going to decide the science.
REPLY: Thanks so much Tom! Let us know when you’ve barricaded yourself in the Alamo, we’ll send help. – Anthony
Failing that, I will write up a site survey using satellite resources.
what are you doing up evan?
Debiasing. (What else would anyone be doing at this hour?)
You got snipped again, kim? Tsk! Tsk!
(And I wasn’t moderating at the time, so I didn’t even get to read it.)
I have long held a theory that I am an extremist anti-scientific denialist, but I can’t seem to find any independently verifiable, empirical evidence that I am.
Even worse, you have to be one for 30 years for it to count as a statistically significant trend.
So do I. Someone who frequents this blog and has artistic talent should design a cool WUWT logo. Anthony, you could partner with one of the web outfits where we could order WUWT stuff (tee shirts, sweatshirts, bumper stickers, coffee mugs, etc.).
What did I tell you? T-shirts are a must.
I guess I qualify as an “addict” finding my way here daily. Congratulations on WUWT, not only is there great information here but as an added dividend, it alway lights up Joe Romm and the Real Climate gang, providing entertainment in addition to information!.
Heeeee Watts, Congrats
🙂
I like this site too,and visit every day.It’s so informative.Thank you.