Another small milestone for WUWT

2x10^7Back on March 15th, 2009,  I was amazed to find that WUWT hit 10 million on the internal WordPress hit counter.

I started the WUWT blog in late November of 2006, and it took me over two years to get there

Now just six months later, I’m amazed again:

At 3:30PM 9/25/09
At 3:30PM PST 9/25/09

Despite the many people of the alarmism bent who dislike what we do here,  WUWT continues to be popular. As always thanks to the many many readers, the guest contributors, and especially to our moderators dbs, Charles, and Evan who keep the flow of conversation going smoothly.

I’m grateful to all of you for the continued success and support. I’m especially grateful to those who spread WUWT links on other websites, helping to drive traffic here.

Now my most important question: what could WUWT do different or better?

– Anthony

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
John Laidlaw
September 25, 2009 3:53 pm

Congratulations Anthony (and mods), and thank you.

September 25, 2009 3:54 pm

Congrats Anthony, a thoroughly deserved milestone for a place of sanity in an insane world. Ditto thanks to the mods and all those who contribute.

Adam from Kansas
September 25, 2009 3:55 pm

Well you do have about the best information out there that debunk catastrophic AGW by allowing tons of info on the Solar Effect, SST effect, and pretty much any other possible effect.
Congrats to you, I wonder how the pro AGW blogs like climate progress and realclimate is doing with their total hits in comparison?
While I do not agree with the billions of years timescale seen often here I’m still here because most people on this blog are united in that AGW as they say doesn’t exist and agree that Cap & Trade will destroy nations.

Michael T
September 25, 2009 4:01 pm

Sorry, OT – but Antactic Ice is way above the fabled 1979-2000 average….
Michael Taylor

Ron de Haan
September 25, 2009 4:02 pm

You don’t have to recommend a good wine!
Congratulations to all of you.

September 25, 2009 4:04 pm

The message is now out there! Keep on this great work!

September 25, 2009 4:09 pm

Congratulations and you’re welcome!
All it takes is an open debate with moderation of those who would dominate the microphone with shrill rants. Oh, and a heck of a lot of work on the part of you, the guest posters, and the moderators 😉
Now just keep it up!

David Ermer
September 25, 2009 4:10 pm

Veni, vidi, vici

September 25, 2009 4:12 pm

20 million hits….. all those enquiring minds. The science is far from settled.

Dave Wendt
September 25, 2009 4:12 pm

Congratulations Anthony, your efforts are much appreciated. You have contributed greatly to turning the tide of this debate, not just by the information you provide here, but with the sharp contrast in tone and approach that you offer to the condescension and close mindedness offered by those who resent your success.

Steven Hill
September 25, 2009 4:15 pm

A great site, thank you!

Ed (a simple old carpenter)
September 25, 2009 4:30 pm

Congrats Anthony, I love this blog and I visit it almost everyday. I tell all my friends about it too. I don’t like to have smoke blown in my face by goverment paid scientist. I want the truth, and here at wuwt I find people also looking for the truth. Very refreshing.

September 25, 2009 4:31 pm

What Dave Wendt (16:12:07) said.
After listening (in the car) to two NPR commentators lamenting the lack of agreement on a new ‘climate’ agreement for Copenhagen, it is a breath of fresh air to come here and read rational debate and discussion.
Onward and upward!
/Mr Lynn

George E. Smith
September 25, 2009 4:40 pm

When the visitor discovers that he is not posting into a black hole; and can actually get a return signal; he is likely to come back again.
Good show Anthony, you manage to keep on finding stuff to give us cause to ponder. With enough pondering going on, some good is bound to come of it.
Compared to those sites that exist only to show that the man behind the curtain still bellows, you have a great recipe here Anthony; Congratulations
And maybe in a couple of days, we may see the JAXA ice recross the 2005 line; or maybe not; so we’ll be back to find out.

September 25, 2009 4:40 pm

To an electric car driver
wait for it…
REPLY: Wait til you see my new one. -A

CPT. Charles
September 25, 2009 4:41 pm


September 25, 2009 4:44 pm

Thanks for all you and your helpers do Anthony, great job.

September 25, 2009 4:45 pm

This is simply the best blog on the Internet bar none, largely due to Anthony’s knowledge of the Earth’s climate and his outstanding ability to present issues in a clear and comprehensible manner, while accurately representing the science.

Jerry Lee Davis
September 25, 2009 4:48 pm

Congratulations, and thank you Anthony, Charles, Evan, and guest writers who contribute from time to time. Reading this blog is normally one of the highpoints of my day.
After the battle is over, when the general population (of the world) understands the errors [snip] of the AGW alarmists, this site will be remembered as a primary force for truth that helped lead the way.
May God bless you all.

Leon Brozyna
September 25, 2009 4:58 pm

The Energizer Bunny® looks rather limp next to you.

John Michalski
September 25, 2009 4:58 pm

Many thanks to you, Anthony, and all who contribute, moderate, correct, debate
and generally lurk (my current status). The open minds found here are what keeps me sane in this ever-maddening world. Keep up the fantastic work. It is appreciated by all, hence, the 20,000,000 hits!

Brian P
September 25, 2009 4:59 pm

Good product

September 25, 2009 5:01 pm

Good on you guys Anthony, dbs, Charles, and Evan !!

Jerry Lee Davis
September 25, 2009 5:06 pm

Here is the link to an August 2009 article in Scientific American that mentions WattsUpWithThat, that some of you (who haven’t seen it yet) might find interesting:

September 25, 2009 5:06 pm

Excellent! Very quick growth. A job well done by the WUWT Team (and especially its leadership)! At this rate, you might reach 30 million by early next year, perhaps even Christmas (or pick your favorite end of year holiday).

September 25, 2009 5:07 pm

It would be nice to sees stats on “newcomers”

September 25, 2009 5:08 pm

Who knew talking about weather (sorry, climate) can be so interesting?

James Allison
September 25, 2009 5:10 pm

Cheers Anthony, dbs, Charles, and Evan. This site is my daily addiction.

September 25, 2009 5:10 pm

OT but me thinks accuweather should be under Pro AGW sites. Look a this drivel

September 25, 2009 5:11 pm

Thank you and hats off to you and the team!

September 25, 2009 5:11 pm

Great stuff Anthony. I know I hit your site twice a day and link a couple of times a week. I think part of the appeal is the well reasoned, non-inflamatory style you bring to the discussion.
Here’s to 40!

James Allison
September 25, 2009 5:13 pm

I wonder how many AGW scientists surreptitiously visit this site and quietly agree with the comments made here.

September 25, 2009 5:14 pm

Wished I were the one who got the 20,000,000th hit 🙁

September 25, 2009 5:23 pm

Congrats Mr Watts & thank you for this informative blog. Here’s to a cool 40 miilion by years end??

Capn Jack Walker
September 25, 2009 5:46 pm

It seems a quiet respectful scientific news letter has a place in the new Internet world.
I like the threads BTW, they are mostly respectful and sometimes humorous.
I like the moderation but especially the resultant explanation rulings on topic and behaviour, like everything else it is detailed.

September 25, 2009 5:48 pm

Congratulations Anthony
I believe that you are making a difference! Thank you for your efforts.

September 25, 2009 5:51 pm

Mazel tov.

Chas Wynn
September 25, 2009 5:54 pm

Thank you for your efforts. This site is a valuable source of climate related information combined with stimulating discussion and a good dose of entertainment. A true light in the wilderness of politically correct dogma.

September 25, 2009 5:55 pm

Congratulations Anthony and to your team.

September 25, 2009 5:57 pm

I have a college degree in physical science. I have learned so much on this webblog. It was very dishearting to hear the mooney interview where he basicly trashed this webblog. Thank you so much Mr Watts you have educated many many people.

September 25, 2009 5:58 pm

It´s just unbelievable!. Congratulations!

Matthew W
September 25, 2009 6:12 pm

Congrats on one of the best sites on the internet!!!!

September 25, 2009 6:16 pm

Thank you, Anthony, for your graciousness. For articulating the scientific basis for the questions this non-scientist instinctively had with human-caused warming, and for not being so much a pro or anti AGW person, but instead a “let’s look at the data and let it lead us to a conclusion” person.
Thanks also for the firm hand of moderation. I am sure it hurts when it comes down, but it makes the site so much more enjoyable because it keeps some of the wildest speculations and the worst bile from overpowering the rest of the content.
So, thank you, Anthony, moderators, contributors, and learned audience participants (e.g., Leif). Know that even when you get into esoteric details that the rest of us will never understand, we’re still listening and hopefully learning.

September 25, 2009 6:20 pm

I really like your site. I have only been reading it for a couple of months, but have learned a lot by doing so. Thank You.

September 25, 2009 6:24 pm

Congratulations. You’re obviously doing something right, and it’s not simply serving as an echo chamber. Keep it up.

Layne Blanchard
September 25, 2009 6:28 pm

I’m an addict. As always, Anthony, Thanks. I’m voting with my wallet. I suggest all the rest of you do the same. We need to keep this kind of information flowing. It’s a very small price to pay.

September 25, 2009 6:28 pm

Anthony – Many congratulations to yourself and your worthy colleagues who help run this site. Congratulations too to the regular posters who help make the site what it is.
What you should know is that people like me (and there are probably thousands of people like me) come to this site on a very regular basis (in my own case, usually daily). We never post, we never ask questions and we never get involved in the various threads. But we do read. We do think about what is discussed here. And we do use the information to help us form our own opinions.
Here in the UK, it’s very, very hard to get any information through the normal media outlets other than that which follows the AGW/ACC line – apart from one or two columnist/reporters. I am sure those living in other countries around the world find exactly the same. So blogs like yours actually perform a very important service. It really does help to be able to look at things from a different perspective. It really does help to see the hard but, generally, fair critiques of the various papers, reports and general information released.
Many thanks and long may you continue.

September 25, 2009 6:31 pm

It might be nice to include a contribution to support the site along with all the kudos.

The Engineer
September 25, 2009 6:33 pm

Congrats and thanks from Denmark.

September 25, 2009 6:35 pm

Congratulations, Anthony and moderators! Excellent site in all respects. This is what the internet should be!

September 25, 2009 6:45 pm

Well done all. I know how much work goes into this. You should be quite proud of yourselves–now get back to work!

September 25, 2009 6:49 pm

The WUWT blog is the only one that has kept my interest for months, or more accurately, years on end. I’m a near daily visitor – good grief, I’m glad I’ll never know the exact number of hours I’ve spent reading and learning here – I probably could have gone to college and earned a degree in Meteorology or Physics in that amount of time!
Anyway, keep up the good work and thank you!

Gordon Ford
September 25, 2009 6:56 pm

Congratulations Anthony and helpers. Where else can an idea be peer reviewed in nanoseconds, or just a little bit longer?
Keep up the good work, you have set the global standard!!!

Keith Minto
September 25, 2009 7:09 pm

Congratulations to all on a fine site and those that contribute to its energetic but moderate tone.
This letter from the Financial Times I feel sums up the WUWT readership. The path that this 70yr old reader followed to become critical of AGW is similar to my path, and I have also read the same books. Her point was not just to read critical material, but have enough scientific knowledge to make an independent judgement about what seems to be correct and plausible and to retain one’s curiosity for new ideas.
For sake of stability I would like to see more linear readership growth……hate to reach a ‘tipping point’!

September 25, 2009 7:16 pm

Now my most important question: what could WUWT do different or better?
You could purge The Tips & Notes section. It’s overloading my cache and locking the browser.

September 25, 2009 7:24 pm

Thirty million hits by 1 Jan 2010?
REPLY: Doubtful, but reader can always help by placing links on other blogs. – A

Claude Harvey
September 25, 2009 7:31 pm

Congratulations, Anthony!
You have established a “skeptic magnet” in the marketplace of ideas that was sorely lacking even a couple of years ago. You have attracted some world-class talent to your outlet along with a monster audience for that talent’s work. In so doing, I think your place is secure when the history is written of how an entire planet had gone stark mad over a fallacious scientific theory and was eventually restored to rational thinking. Any historic reconstruct of how that tide was turned will surely prominently feature you and your Internet site. I hope that history includes your stellar moderators, without whose even-handed performance the lively attraction for an audience would not exist.

Bill P
September 25, 2009 7:37 pm

Thanks for a great web site and tremendously stimulating company. It’s fun to be challenged by so many issues, and to watch so many trying to tackle the mysteries of the universe. Take targeted ads for instance. Recently, I was dunned here by some ads for French bidets. I wondered if, like Hansel dribbling cookie crumbs behind, I brought these advertisers here as a result of my peripatetic wanderings through home-improvement sites… or if I’ve merely joined a higher class of people when I click on WUWT.
We’re all pilgrims, I suppose.
Thanks again, and congratulations on your great success!

September 25, 2009 7:41 pm

Congrats; I have a question — has NOAA or NASA or any other government agency releases a carbon cycle diagram anytime since 1997?
I find one fron 1994 and one from the period, 1992-1997 but nothing later; they have different values but identical positive additions to atmospheric CO2.
Surely there must be something newer or did that close the door on followups.
[REPLY – Try the DOE (middle of the page). ~ Evan]

September 25, 2009 7:44 pm

Excellent, gents, gracias! Nothing.

Mike Bryant
September 25, 2009 7:48 pm

I’ll add my congratulations and deep thanks to you, Anthony, and your great team dbs, Charles, and Evan. I know that everyone appreciates you since at every milestone you also receive the thanks of the AGW proponents, who also appreciate the even handed moderation here. Reminiscing… I recall some of the trials and tribulations that you went through over the last couple of years. With the team you have in place you have done a magnificent job. Since you asked, I’d say that you might start looking for your next moderator before it gets as hectic as it has in the past… (I have a feeling you already have a couple in mind)… The sheer volume of articles and comments has really cut into my sleep time. 🙂 But I’m not complaining… Keep ’em coming you, your team, the contributors, and the commentors, from pro and con, are what make this site special. You’re changing the world.
Mike Bryant

September 25, 2009 7:50 pm

Now my most important question: what could WUWT do different or better?
1) A “Science for Dummies” page of some kind for younger readers (by that I mean college-age). Maybe a brief primer on why most of us here believe what we do, or don’t believe what’s been shoved down their throats since they were in grade school.
2) Wore my new ICECAP t-shirt to the bowling alley the other night, several people got a laugh out of it. Hint-hint. 🙂 I know it can be a pain, but maybe it’s something you could do once or twice a year. Besides, it would help pay for your expenses or any projects you’re working on.
Congrats. And thanks for keeping us informed.

David Ball
September 25, 2009 7:51 pm

Anthony and moderators, I want to congratulate you on 20 million and counting !! I have said many times how important this site is to me. To have a voice is so important after being shouted down for so long. It now appears that the only definitive method of debate was their ability to shout. Regarding what comes next for this blog; I trust Anthony’s instincts in this matter and fully support whatever it is he would like to do, even if it is to remain the same. Obviously what is being done here works very very well.

Don S.
September 25, 2009 7:55 pm

Well done, Mr W. Been waiting for this day with great anticipation. You have taken on a thankless job which has nevertheless informed many thousands of the, to me, incredible asininity of the current “scientific” establishment. As an old soldier, I find the attitudes and actions of many who oppose you extremely childish. The bottom line is: If you can’t prove your point, shut the hell up. Anyone may argue whether this attitude is scientific, but generations of people in the trenches have lived by its verity and great events have been evinced. I find common cause with you and wish you continued success.

September 25, 2009 8:00 pm

Congrats, Anthony! This site has been a wealth of information.
I have learned a lot here and I always enjoy signing on.
Keep up the good work.
Norfolk, VA, USA

September 25, 2009 8:01 pm

Wait a second, have you been manipulating the raw data for your site hits?
Just ribbin’ ya. Congratulations! Your site is a beacon of light that shines upon the dark corners of the otherwise noble human endeavor that is science.

September 25, 2009 8:09 pm

“Now my most important question: what could WUWT do different or better”
If it ain’t broken, don’t fix it. You are suffering the Michael Jackson syndrome. You do not have to have the endorcement of everyone on the planet to be successful. Your rule for success is to be YOURSELF. PERIOD. And, more importantly, IF you start changing your “being” to get more adulation, well then, you end up like Michael AND the OBAMA FREAK!
Just keep up the good work!

J. Bob
September 25, 2009 8:17 pm

Great job, one of the best on the web!

L. Gardy LaRoche
September 25, 2009 8:26 pm

[size=14][i]what could WUWT do different or better?
[color=#3333FF][u][i]Please[/i][/u][/color], Number comments.
It’d make it easier to follow discussions.

Frank Ravizza
September 25, 2009 8:31 pm

4e7 before the end of ’09!

September 25, 2009 8:31 pm

I know what I would like, although there are so many problems that it will never happen. I’d like as may of us a possible to record temperature properly (following guidelines) using a simple device (the ones you advertise seem very appropriate) every 30 minutes in as many locations as possible and get the data collected and analysed.
The problem will be that it will take 10 years or more before it means anything. I’d still love to see it happen, and I’d be first in line to start. It would be fascinating to compare with the ‘official’ figures!

September 25, 2009 8:32 pm

For me, an every morning, WUWT is the first port of call on the internet to see what new and interesting facet of the global warming / climate change debate will be up today.
We all spread the fact that a lot of data and articles, often sourced from other origins, if they appear on WUWT will have a veracity that will stand close scrutiny and can be quoted with confidence on other climate blogs.
Why is WUWT so popular and increasing in popularity?
1 / New and interesting and very diverse data, information and content each day and often more than one article.
This content is couched within a firm and skeptical outlook but is done with a moderate tone.
Keeping this pace up with the posting new material is a feat on it’s own!
2/ Increasing amounts of easy to read content from both science based sources and from other well qualified sources in the climate and science fields.
3 / An element of gossip and scandal and the outing of political machinations and the associated scandals in the climate science field which keeps everybody on their toes as getting caught out with fiddling the books in science can and often does spell the death knell for a career.
It is human nature to gossip and do a little toe dance when somebody else gets caught out so a bit of scandal and gossip now and then keeps everybody really interested.
In doing so, WUWT actively promotes and reinforces the concept that science should and must aim to operate at a very high level of integrity.
WUWT [ and Climate Audit ] does all of the above really well.
4 / The accuracy and veracity of the content and information headlined on WUWT has proven, over time, to be excellent, allowing WUWT to be quoted elsewhere with full confidence that the information will stand hard scrutiny.
5/ / Excellent moderation allowing a free flow of diverse opinions in comments but with tight a criteria which does not allow rants or extreme language or extreme attitudes or to be too derogatory of those that may hold different or even opposing views.
Extremism just puts most people right off except for a particular psychology that seems to revel in such extremist statements and views.
Unfortunately, extremism is a characteristic of many climate blogs but WUWT is notable for its lack of extremism in it’s headline information and in it’s comments section.
6 / Excellent and often very highly qualified commenters who are a major part of the success of WUWT.
These diverse commenters also exhibit a common down to earth, plain language touch and are accepting of all sorts of odd comments and questions from us laymen without putting down those of us who may not be as well informed or qualified.
Anthony has made it clear that this is the way you will be allowed to comment or you will leave and that is a huge plus for those of us who are only laymen in this climate debate.
7 / From 4 above; The numerous commenters provide a wide range of links to other sources which I find very useful and interesting in a lot of instances and which often lead onto other interesting facets of the climate debate.
8 / Always in a plain language format that is easily understood by almost any interested layman.
Trying to decipher some of the science lingo on some other blogs is a feat in itself.
9 / Layout and format is very simple, clear, attractive and without any unnecessary and extraneous clutter and consequently, a very easy read.
Equal to the best and easiest layouts and reads that I have seen on a blog.
10 / Ultimately the characteristics of a blog will reflect the character of it’s owner.
WUWT is a highly intelligent, wide ranging in it’s views, tolerant with limits of the vagaries of human nature, clear in it’s expressions and goals and one of the most notable contributors in the whole climate debate.
So Anthony, from another of your many admirers, please accept my congratulations and sincere thanks for your work and output.
ps; Please, please provide a full quote review panel for the comments box so we can fix our stuff ups before they go to the mods.

September 25, 2009 8:33 pm

I haven’t posted much here but I visit numerous times every day. WUWT is by far the best climate blog (at least for us laypeople – sorry, CA, you are also great but often somewhat above me).
Congratulations Anthony and thank you for your indefatigable efforts.

September 25, 2009 8:39 pm

> Now my most important question: what could WUWT do different or better?
Most of the things that come to my mind are really things that WordPress could do better, and I don’t want to list them as it would distract from stuff that is feasible. One thing I’ve been thinking of doing, though it might be easier from your side of the wall, is to make a monthly index of all the topics.
One thing I frequently do, probably to the annoyance of some, is when someone posts some exciting thing they just read about is to find the WUWT article from a couple months before and post the link to it. (I generally use the WordPress search tool, one of the few things it’s acceptable for.)
It would be nice to have a monthly list of all the titles to let people browse, maybe a full list and then sublists by categories. (E.g. this one is “Announcements.”) If it’s no easier to do for you, I’d be tempted to write a program to produce it from my view.

Evan Jones
September 25, 2009 8:47 pm

Thanks, guys. We moderators play our small part; we try to allow as much freedom as possible on all sides of the issue short of severe personal abuse or running off the rails.
Kudos to Anthony, who has done something here really special and very important.

September 25, 2009 8:49 pm

By the way, another interesting question is “How has WUWT changed over the last 10 megahits?
The increased readership (and postership) makes it a lot harder to keep up with all the replies to a topic, I’ve given up trying to follow all of them. It’s clear that other people don’t keep up with all of them either, witness the fairly frequent posts that echo something said the day before.
One benefit of having so many active members is that the first I hear about many events, research, and other happenings is here. Several posts in the last few months have appeared before other media get wind of it or have time to get it into print. This makes WUWT one of the better sites for breaking scientific news.
WUWT also seems to be recognized as a medium that is an attractive place for such announcements.
In my mind, this is one of the biggest improvements in WUWT this year. I predict that more ad more sites will turn to WUWT as a source of breaking news on the climate front.
Here’s to another 20 megahits!

September 25, 2009 8:50 pm

Awesome figures there, Anthony! Telling and showing the Populace whats true and real is what’s it’s all about. Sharing stories and giving support to those who deserve’s it says it best, I think! Can we have an encore??? Time will tell!

September 25, 2009 9:03 pm

Fantastic, Anthony. Keep up the great work. BTW, do you and you readers know about the poll on the Economist website? It’s at: .They also have a debate going on.

September 25, 2009 9:04 pm

Whoops, the link address disappeared. It’s

Don S.
September 25, 2009 9:27 pm

@ROM (20:32:53) Thanks for taking the time to fully elucidate AW’s merits. I’m old and verbally parsimonious these days, but wish I’d said the same.

John F. Hultquist
September 25, 2009 9:33 pm

I’ll raise a glass to 20 M.
Anthony wrote: “Now my most important question: what could WUWT do different or better? ”
Not much, just keep it up! Do what suits you.
Some things asked for in these comments can be handled by regular readers answering the questions of those new readers who do ask questions – and they should. I try to respond by suggesting links to articles that I have found clearly written. To do this I have been saving many things and trying, not as successfully as I’d like, to keep track of them. Often, questions can be answered by searching on key terms that a new viewer might not have thought of. I’ve also found that regular internet searches often link to previous WUWT posts and I can quickly point someone to that post and all the comments.
So, I think regular readers can do more to help. And anyone with a question should ask it.
I also click on the ads that I see that are new. Some are oddly out of place but I check them out anyhow. Some are actually interesting. If just a few percent of the regular readers follow this plan WUWT may actually earn a few dollars.
This is a great learning environment.
Thanks Anthony and moderators and all contributors.

September 25, 2009 9:37 pm

Congratualtions on being the Next Big Thing.
What should you do differently?
If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it.

Geoff Sherington
September 25, 2009 9:39 pm

Unprecedented, robust, settled. The largest figure since record keeping began. Higher than 1998.
Now, webmaster, can you make it easier to post images if people do not have their own web sites? Please, pretty please?

September 25, 2009 9:44 pm

You ask “what could WUWT do different or better? ” and apologies to anyone who has already said this (I haven’t read all posts on this page) but I do have a suggestion :
It would be nice to maintain a potted summary, with links, of all the important things we have learned about climate and the conduct of climate science and the climate debate, so that newcomers can get up to speed, and everyone has a document that they can send on to others etc. It would take time, so maybe you could recruit volunteers from the readership here. A structure like the IPCC’s would be appropriate …..
When the AGW scare is over and you have some spare time (!!), you could turn it into a book.

Cassandra King
September 25, 2009 9:45 pm

This site has become the ‘VOR'(voice of reason), many come here for real information that simply doesnt exist anywhere else.
The MSM(main stream media)is blind and deaf for the most part to the actual truth only listening and reporting the ‘consensus’ as dictated by the AGW/MMCC/AAM narrative.
More and more people are seeking the truth, the lies and media manipulation, the polititians lies and deceit has become so obvious that ordinary people have found they have a genuine hunger for the truth and its not being satisfied by the traditional media sources.
Is it any wonder that the political consensus dislikes blogs like these? The cosy consensus is being ruined, the constructed reality being built is being pulled apart under their very noses, each fake report, each fake story, each fake study pulled to bits using the actual truth, can you imagine the frustration and anger of the political classes? All the time, money and effort used to build this solid looking consensus and its falling apart before their eyes, worse still from their point of view the sceptics are winning simply by revealing the truth.
The truth shall set you free!

anna v
September 25, 2009 9:45 pm

What he said:
ROM (20:32:53) :

Mike McMillan
September 25, 2009 9:47 pm

If you build it, they will come.
Thank you, Anthony.

September 25, 2009 9:51 pm

Thanks Anthony et al. I wish I could offer you the original work as a gift, but at least I can offer the link to you and anyone else who would like to take a fabulous 2 minute 36 second break from the nincompoops:

REPLY: Nicely done. Our timescape is but a fleeting moment. – Anthony

F. Ross
September 25, 2009 9:58 pm

My congratulations as well.
(Told ya’ the count would metastasize.)
From time to time posters on your blog are at a loss on how to use html tags.
My suggestion: on your RESOURCES page include a couple of links for primers on html tags. Then all you have to do is refer the poster to your resource page when the question comes up.
If you think this idea has merit here are a couple of satisfactory links on the subject
basic html tags or here another basic html tags site

Phillip Bratby
September 25, 2009 10:07 pm

Congratulations Anthony on an excellent site. I’m amazed that you’re amazed, because this is the only site that scientists of an independent mind can find, and discuss in a civilised manner, all the true information about the weather and climate. We are all grateful for the effort you, your moderators and your contributers, put in.
All the best for the future, keep up the good work, and I look forward to the 30 million mark.

September 25, 2009 10:32 pm


September 25, 2009 10:43 pm

With this number of commenters, some threads become hard to navigate, and some squabbles leap to new threads like a wildfire leaping a fire-break.
The sheer quality of the posts and comments can get drowned (like the ceremonies of innocence).
I’d love to be involved in helping either with moving up to a forum or trying to catalogue/TikiWiki the volume of superb work here.

Hank Hancock
September 25, 2009 10:47 pm

Congratulations Anthony. WUWT is first on my bookmark list and I placed it first on my “Favorite Sites” link on my personal web site. I truly appreciate the intellectual honesty, candor, and broad spectrum of knowledge found here.
I’ll also mention that after 30 years in technology and science I always wondered about those strange coincidences that defy statistics and explanation. Now I know It’s the WATTS effect!
Keep up the good work. It is much appreciated.
Kind regards,
Hank Hancock – Las Vegas, NV

Patrick Davis
September 25, 2009 10:55 pm

“J.Hansford (16:12:03) :
20 million hits….. all those enquiring minds. The science is far from settled.”
It’s no where near enough hits to settle the facts. Although, WUWT was mentioned on ABC here in Australia, so, maybe, just maybe, the word is spreading (Lets hope more so before Copenhagen).

September 25, 2009 10:58 pm

F. Ross (21:58:22) :

From time to time posters on your blog are at a loss on how to use html tags.
My suggestion: on your RESOURCES page include a couple of links for primers on html tags. Then all you have to do is refer the poster to your resource page when the question comes up.

How about ? 🙂

September 25, 2009 11:11 pm

Make the Arctic cool down faster. Oops, too late.

September 25, 2009 11:13 pm

The immediate compelling improvement is — increase width to 1024 pixels. Unforgiveable to keep it at 800 pixels, much as you are loved.

September 25, 2009 11:30 pm

Anthony, hearty congratulations to you , your site’s success is both a credit to you and the team. The extent to which you are being vilified by the pro AGW sites confirms the degree to which your incisive reportage bothers them. WUWT has become my ‘daily read’ and I enjoy swapping ideas and banter here.
A suggestion would be a more readily searchable index to posts. Clicking back through the months and hovering the mouse to try to find articles is ok, if you remember the name of the article, but still a bit time consuming. A site specific google search works quite well, but many people don’t know how to do this.
How about a search page which uses the google site specific search with some tips on how to track down that post you are after?
Keep up the great work.

September 25, 2009 11:45 pm

Well done Anthony. Real,observational,un”adjusted” information is the hallmark of your site.A question-why is it that deltoid and other alarmist sites prefer to ban people than to debate this issue?

Paul Vaughan
September 25, 2009 11:49 pm

Re: L. Gardy LaRoche (20:26:06)
Just use “Edit” “Find” (or shortcut: Ctrl-F) – (you’ll find as fast as you can click).

Michael D Smith
September 25, 2009 11:50 pm

2E7! Great achievement for you Anthony and all. Going exponential. Doubling in 6 months… 40 million by March if on the same rate, but I suspect even the growth rate is increasing. With all I’ve learned here and the exposure you’re getting, the facts are becoming known at an ever faster rate… I suppose the term viral means an exponential*exponential growth rate. Keep up the good work guys, people worldwide are really starting to examine the facts and basis for these relentless alarmist claims, and are rejecting them wholesale… Mike S.

September 26, 2009 12:01 am

Congratulations to Anthony and team wuwt.
In a dim and distant future, the icicles will form apon the the bronze statue of Anthony pointing to a badly sited MMTS and people will stare in silent wonder upon one of the few good men that dared to question the science.

Michael D Smith
September 26, 2009 12:11 am

Howard (20:33:10) :
Congratulations Anthony and thank you for your indefatigable efforts.
Howard, I had to look that up… I’m submitting that word to O’Reilly for the word of the day… “Please be indefatigable”. We could all use such advice. I plan to be such a guy tomorrow!

John Mackie
September 26, 2009 12:15 am

You should make a chart of the daily hits and process it to look like a hockeystick.
Easily done.

Stephen Skinner
September 26, 2009 12:17 am

Congratulations Anthony. This site is an incredible forum / resource, even with the smatterings of pro or anti AGW rants!

September 26, 2009 12:24 am

Congrats Anthony!
But how many of those hits are Flanagan? 🙂

Mark Fawcett
September 26, 2009 12:59 am

Congratulations Anthony, by far and away the most accessible and even handedly moderated site in the climate change debate.
What could you do differently / next? Well, I realise it’s somewhat out of your hands but being on the front page (ideally at the top) when you Google “climate change debate” or something similar would be very powerful weapon in your arsenal.
So come on guys ‘n’ gals with your own websites and especially you journos who visit here (we know you do) – give Anthony a mention via a link; the more external links, the more Google likes it…

September 26, 2009 1:10 am

WUWT T-shirts are a terrific idea. Revenue source for Anthony and a way to stimulate interest in others. Let’s not forget, most people are never exposed to any AGW sceptic material.

September 26, 2009 1:11 am

Took my daughter to a doctor 12 months ago and we were the last customers on a Saturday. Doc and I struck up a conversation about the virtues of scepticism and he gave me the link to WUWT. Here in Australia there are many gullible people and each day I send emails to in on my address book with the latest WUWT info. Thank you Anthony for doing what needs to be done!

Dave vs Hal
September 26, 2009 1:12 am

Great site Anthony & helpers, many articles really give my brain a workout ( as if I need this writing up a science honours thesis!). That link by [ Jerry Lee Davis (17:06:07)] to the Scientific American article about AGW sceptics was very intereting. The commenters gave S.A. a right serve for their disparaging attitude to amateur scientists.

September 26, 2009 1:16 am

Congratulations, the comments above say it all: a well judged mixture of science, courtesy, topicality and sheer good humour. I post rarely but read avidly and learn much.

September 26, 2009 1:22 am

Bravo, Anthony.You are helping keep Science alive. Data, critical enqiry, observation & testing. All is not lost!
Beth, down under.

Chris Schoneveld
September 26, 2009 1:33 am

Has all my clicking on the Google ads contributed in any way to the cost of maintaining this great site?

John Wright
September 26, 2009 1:42 am

Really good news.
I think the secret of this blog’s success is that it’s not only a rant against AGW, is it? It’s just that such is the most pressing issue of our day. But when I peek behind your “About us” button I see a host of other ambitions and aspirations. Even when the present AGW storm has blown over and the hypocrites and exploiters exposed for what they are (and that is bound to happen), this blog will continue to be of interest thanks to you and your collaborators’ open enquiring minds and healthy scepticism.
More power to your elbow, John

September 26, 2009 1:45 am

Many thanks Anthony et al !
(I hope I’m not get into trouble with my boss by visiting ~10 times a day…)

September 26, 2009 1:47 am

Anthony, your work has similar deserved success as J K Rowling – because it comes from a basis of human integrity. This I think is what “Science” has temporarily lost sight of, entranced by the many astounding discoveries she has made, neglecting her first love of ordinary things like thermometer records, and thinking that nothing can stop or question her. But always, always, the most humble data shine when they come from that basis of human integrity.
I realize you started from a strong position – 30 years’ media work on weather. Thank you for asking the question – what could the next steps be? I’ve had many thoughts about that.
In general, I would like to see you reach out for more specific help from the readership here, to consolidate more of the science that has been arising here. This has several specific aspects:
(1) starting a worldwide survey of temperature records and station histories to set a precedent for clean, open, collaborative work, where professionals and amateurs can, once again, cooperate (I’m going to do another post on the unbelievables of the NASA UK records next week). IMO someone else needs to volunteer to design and coordinate such a project, somewhat equivalent to your Surface Stations project.
(2) The “Tips and Notes” thread is a good idea but needs rethinking so that it never gets too long. 300 posts maximum IMO, and weeding would help. Again, another volunteer might come forward if you or someone can suggest / define the new plan.
(3) as suggested above, an intelligent index for past threads. Here it’s especially unfortunate that one cannot highlight specific posts. I think Word Press themselves should be alerted to this issue.
(4) more actual posts that survey the work achieved so far, the science learned, and the way forward, with specific invites for readers to collaborate. Initially a bit more work for you to set up, but in the long run it should take weight off your shoulders and place this work on firmer ongoing footing. For none of us are mindless to the fact that WUWT and CA in particular are blazing trails for a science of the future that recognizes the importance of courtesy and staying human and accessible and keeping integrity – that all this informs the least of the details.
(5) nearly forgot this one!! Links to primers on all aspects of Climate Science, for newcomers and learners here.
Cheers from another loyal supporter, whose own understanding of science has grown by leaps and bounds here, and who wants to pass on to others the best of what she has learned, and wants to see Science upheld once again as she remembers it once was. Ah yes, let’s give thought to the potentials of “Dad’s Army” here – we can do so much with our spare time at these wonderful computers these days…

Jimmy Haigh
September 26, 2009 1:48 am

Well done Anthony. I agree with all of the above!
20 million of us can’t be wrong.

September 26, 2009 2:05 am

Thank you Anthony for making a difference.
Thank you Commentators for making it grow…
Thank you DBS, Charles, and Evan for letting it flow…
All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing.
Edmund Burke

Please don’t change this beacon of light and hope.

Mark Hind
September 26, 2009 2:13 am

The light at the end of the tunnel gets a little brighter. keep it up.

September 26, 2009 2:21 am

WUWT can be improved a lot by doing the following for the Comments:
+ Better Styling.
+ Alternating row colors (so we readers don’t get lost).
+ Author Image placeholder.
+ Numbering Comments (starting by 0,1,2,3…)
+ Paginating Comments.
And we can be more happy.
Drop me an email if you need help.

September 26, 2009 2:23 am

Also, WUWT need a new, better design.
The Sidebar is a mess, there are many free-alternatives out there much better and modern when it comes to WP.

September 26, 2009 2:43 am

Congratulations !
First thing in the morning, last thing at night. I have to say I may have a problem . . .
The open debate, the non-condescending tone, the expert opinions, the accessibility, the warm welcome (even for the scientific illiterati like myself), the honesty and the abilty to say ‘I may be wrong’ all leave me proud to stand tall and loudly proclaim . . .
ps. I’m dead chuffed you are still using my ‘Quote of the Week’ graphic – let me know when you want a new one.

Bob Highland
September 26, 2009 2:50 am

The road to truth can be a lonely one, and in the AGW debate it is certainly a road less travelled.
WUWT is a flaming beacon of light in an atmosphere made murky by dubious science driven by wilfulness, blind faith, and the kind of bigoted, patronising and insulting zealotry that would have even brought a blush to members of the Spanish Inquisition (which no one expected).
When the naked (unaltered) facts about our remarkable world and its supremely dynamic, almost unknowable climatic subtleties are finally clear and undisputed, this blog and its perpetrators, contributors and supporters, will be able to stand proud for never submitting to mob rule or falling for received so-called wisdom based upon a consensus of those who are apparently too easily pleased.
The climate story, and mankind’s reaction to it, must never be about the history of the last five minutes. It has to be about the scientific method and its constant bedfellow, the spirit of honest enquiry, uncorrupted by those
with a craven, misanthropic agenda or driven by political chicanery.
Viva WUWT!

September 26, 2009 2:59 am

Many congratulations, Mr Watts, on achieving this important milestone. I’m one of the second ten-million, having bought my first-ever computer in March of this year as a retirement present for myself. I’ve learned so much in six months, and you can rely on me to be responsible for a hundred or more of the next ten-million.
Best wishes, Dave.

September 26, 2009 3:01 am

Congratulations Anthony! This is well deserved.
I don’t like compromising the truth, and WUWT provides the sanity that is lacking in many other places. Keep the focus on science, in particular I enjoy the solar threads.
My only problem after WUWT became so popular is that the number of articles and comments require more than 24 hours a day to follow….

September 26, 2009 3:05 am

I’m still waiting for the T shirts to help us convert the ‘other side’ You really don’t seem to like the idea though, shame. Maybe just some ‘watts approved’ T shirt artworks that readers could submit and people could download and print themselves.
Other than that, pretty great the way it is.

mark twain
September 26, 2009 3:07 am

congratualtions to all working on this site!
i have only one whish:
try to get more studies about feedbacks and find results against the high sensitiviti of co2, because this is the only think wich is realy wrong in the agw hypothesis.

September 26, 2009 3:07 am

Congratulations Anthony from a member of “The Climate Sceptics” political party of Australia. You are a beacon in a world of darkness. An exposer of the weakness of the AGW hypothesis. An invaluable resource in an unfriendly popular media.
You may be interested to know that our party goes from strenght to strenght and approaching our first test as a political party.
For those of you in Australia who don’t know about us visit http://www.climatesceptics for more information.
Well done everyone. May the truth win in the end!!!!

Alan the Brit
September 26, 2009 3:37 am

Congratulations. This has to be near the top for science blogs. That’s why it is hated by the AGW clique/claque so much! You know you are on to something when ad hominem attacks pour forth, but not against the science.
Keep it up, it’s one of the fw sane things to read here in the UK, we need you & all your contributors, whether guest possting or passing comments for discussion!

September 26, 2009 4:08 am

With hits 20 million and rising,
Your server may soon need up-sizing.
Keep on posting the truth,
Keep the commenters couth,
And more success won’t be surprising.

September 26, 2009 4:20 am

I am a person who believes in protecting the environment, and developing alternative energy sources. I even think that cap and trade could be a good idea because it will circulate energy profits, making them available for innovation. But I can not stand the hyped up global warming propaganda that passes it self of as science. A movement that is focused on scaring people and ostracizing anyone who tries to speak about anything that doesn’t fit the global warming agenda, needs to be called out. So I am always happy to visit your site, even though I don’t always agree with what is said here, I do find balance and inquiry into what is real rather than closed eye dogma. So thanks.

September 26, 2009 4:27 am

Australian Senator, Steve Fielding, recently made an effort to form a balanced judgement on the validity of the science supporting the move to an Emissions Trading Scheme. In a rather astute move intended to forego endless debate, he posed three straightforward questions to Penny Wong’s team. This seemed to have a polarizing effect as it became obvious that the underlying science based argument was suspect, but not the political motivations.
After 20M interactions on WUWT, I propose a rationalisation or condensation of what the data is ‘honestly’ indicating (Steve Fielding style) under a ‘WUWT Top Ten’ tab. Ideally this could become a reference for policy makers, highlighting a more data focussed perspective to balance the alarmist gospel dispensed by the MSM self-perpetuated feeding frenzy. This could be structured as follows:
WUWT Top Ten Knowns
1. CO2 atmospheric levels are increasing on trend at observation locations
2. Average global surface temperatures have not increased on trend through the 21st century and have actually shown a slight decline
3. IPCC GCMs did not predict a decrease in average global temperatures during the 21st century. GCMs are currently not capable of predicting climate based on non-linear forcings
4. Sea ice extent is showing a negative trend in the Arctic and a positive trend in the antarctic, with global sea ice showing no significant trend
etc etc
WUWT Top Ten Unknowns
1. Effect of CO2 on climate
2. CO2 residence time in the atmosphere
3. Solar influence on climate variation
4. ENSO, AMO influence on climate variation
5. Cosmic ray influence on climate variation
6. Milankovitch cycle influence on climate variation
etc etc
Each point should be substantiated by reference to a data archive or peer reviewed articles, and updated regularly as new information becomes available.
Just a thought….

September 26, 2009 4:30 am

Here’s to the next 20 million. Great job.

P Wilson
September 26, 2009 4:34 am

mark twain (03:07:02
There are precise calculations of c02 heat transfer, although the AGW confederacy don’t use them, so make factual errors and misrepresentations, probably due to fashionable political bias. Thats how official thinktank scientists and politicians make money and achieve power, afterall. To begin with, records of c02 in the atmosphere pre-date 1958. They go back as a scientifically valid record to at least 1810. From then on, the methods of recording carbon dioxide were as reliable as today, and in fact higher than 380ppm. In 1812 for example there were three maximum periods of around 480ppm in the northern hemisphere,
The other important factual error is that Mr Angstrom himself put the theories of carbon dioxide concocted by Arrhenius and followed by Keeling to the test by placing as much carbon dioxide in a column found in the air reaching to the top of the atmosphere. The amount of radiation that got through the tube scarcely changed when he cut the quantity of gas in half or doubled it. However, the earth, unlike the experiment, isn’t closed to convection. Efectively, there isn’t anything to “trap” heat. (Thats why it goes cooler when night occurs) Keeling of course wanted everything to fit his hypothesis so suppressed data that didn’t. YET he knew it was a reliable record.
since then almost every form of spectroscopy shows that the same takes place with low frequency radiation re-radiated from the earth, and that carbon has no effect in causing heat transfers or delays that might change the temperature. Thats why its colder even several hundred metres up where c02 is found, and at its most “active” than at ground level. So where do we look for the record? Certainly not ancient ice. It shows that there was never an increase or decrease in temperature according to c02, but that it was an effect, rather than a cause of temperature change.
C02 absorbs heat in the 15 micron level which in atmospheric terms is almost nothing. Offset against the fact that 99% of c02 is non-anthropogenic, and that cooling takes place whilst c02 is recorded as higher, then there is no argument that 1 percent of anthropogenic c02 has any effect, if 99 percent has a miniscule effect.
Also, carbon absorbs heat logarithmically and not exponentially, and vegetation absorbs c02 exponentially. That means that the 1st 50ppm of c02 absorbs all the heat available and additional quantity after that doesn’t absorb any more heat.
certainly, there are pre-1958 scientifically valid records of an excess of 380ppm, and many in excess of 450ppm of c02, so its impossible to accept that 380ppm will cause anything like temperatures from that period.
Also, c02 is at its most active in the lower troposphere, as the theory goes, in order to heat the earth as much as the atmosphere. Yet the lower troposphere is below freezing point.
It is hard to imagine that a ‘greenhouse gas’ at -2C to -40C can heat the earth. That is tantamount to saying that a block of ice will fry eggs.
Its important to understand that the greenhouse effect is caused by water vapour, which is itself only an effect and not a cause of climate change.
However, for practical puroposes, c02 from 1810, to the present correlates most strongly with MDO’ phases around the arctic

Donald (Australia)
September 26, 2009 4:37 am

Anthony, congratulations to you and your team.
The site has respect for the scientific method. No wonder it rates so highly, and no wonder it worries the heck out of those who would abuse that method.

Martyn B
September 26, 2009 4:40 am

Keep up the good work.

P Wilson
September 26, 2009 4:45 am

The weight of 1000 L of air is 1.23 Kg, or 1.23 N (Manrique. 2002. Oxford. Page 290).
The density of the dry air at T = 0 °C and P = 101.325 kPa is 1.292 kg/m^3.
The density of the mixed air at T = 25 °C and P = 101.325 kPa is 1.18 g/L, or 1.18 Kg/m^3. (Manrique. 2002).
At mbient T = 25 °C and P = 1 atm, dry air has a density of 1.168 kg/m^3 (Pitts & Sissom. 1998. Page 344)
At present, 1 cubic meter of air contains 0.000690 Kg of CO2 (690 mg).
Δ [CO2] in the last 200 years = 101 ppmv = 0.000164 Kg / m^3
Formula to be applied:
q = e (σ) (A) [(Ts) ^4 – (Ta) ^4]
Where q is the heat transferred by radiation from one system to another, e is the emissivity of the surface that absorbs energy, σ is the Stephan-Boltzmann constant, A is the area of interchange of energy, Ta is the temperature of the absorbent surface and Ts is the temperature of the emitter.
Known variables and constants:
Data taken from the meteorological station in Monterrey, Mexico: On June 22, 2007 at 18.05 UT, at the coordinates 25º 48´ North latitude and 100º 19′ West longitude, and an altitude of 513 meters ASL, the air temperature at 1.5 m above ground level was 299.65 K (26.5 °C), whereas the ground temperature was 300.15 K (27 °C). Which is the load of heat transferred from the ground to the mass of CO2 when 1 cubic meter of air contains 0.00069 kg.
e (at 300.15 K and a partial pressure of 0.00034 atm-m) = 0.001 (it has no units because it refers to an index).
σ = 5.6697 x 10^-8 W/m^2*K^4
A = 1 m^2
Ta = 299.65 K [(299.65 K) ^4 = 8062266098.565 K^4]
Ts = 300.15 K [(300.15 K) ^4 = 8116212154.05 K^4]
Ts^4 – Ta^4 = 53946055.485 K^4
Introducing magnitudes:
q = 0.001 (5.6697 x 10^-8 W/m^2*K^4) (1 m^2) (53946055.485 K^4) = 0.0031 W
If the transference of energy occurred each second, then the equivalent energy is:
q = 0.0031 W*s
0.0031 W*s = 0.0031 J
What is the change of temperature caused by the heat transfer of 0.0031 W*s?
Formula to be applied:
ΔT = q/m (Cp)
Where q is the heat transferred from a warm system to a colder system (for this case, soil is the warm system and air is the cold system), m is the mass of the interferer system (carbon dioxide) and Cp is the Specific Heat of the interferer system (carbon dioxide) at 300.15 K and constant pressure of 1 atm.
Known variables and constants:
q = 0.0031 J
m = 0.00062 Kg
Cp = 842 J/Kg*K
Introducing quantities:
ΔT = 0.0031 J /0.00062 Kg (842 J/Kg*K) = 0.006 K
Six thousandths of one degree is a negligible change of temperature.
We can apply the formula to extreme cases, for example, the case on April 6, 2007, when the temperature of the soil was 316.95 K and the temperature of the air was 305.45 K:
Ts^4 – Ta^4 = 1386835138.99 K^4
Introducing magnitudes to the formula:
q = 0.001 (5.6697 x 10^-8 W/m^2*K^4) (1 m^2) (1386835138.99 K^4) = 0.0786 W
In terms of energy, 0.0786 W*s = 0.0786 J
Now let us apply the formula to convert heat to change of temperature:
ΔT = 0.0786 J /0.00062 Kg (842 J/Kg*K) = 0.0786 J / 0.522 J*K = 0.15 K
The change of temperature caused by 0.0786 Joules of energy absorbed by 0.00062 Kg of CO2 in the atmosphere on April 6, 2007 was 0.15 °C through one second.
Considering that the difference between the temperature of the soil and the temperature of the air was 11.5 °C, the amount of 0.15 °C is negligible (just 1.3% of the total).
We would be mistaken if we were to think that the change of temperature was caused by CO2 when, in reality, it was the Sun that heated up the soil. Carbon dioxide only interfered with the energy emitted by the soil and absorbed a small amount of that radiation (0.0786 Joules), but carbon dioxide did not cause any warming. Please never forget two important points: the first is that carbon dioxide is not a source of heat, and the second is that the main source of warming for the Earth is the Sun

Joachim Overdick
September 26, 2009 4:47 am

A very good webblog! I always “pop” in too see if there is new information about the climate. Here in Sweden the “alarmist” totally dominate the media and the politicel debate. Her in Sweden the global warming is an “axiom”.

September 26, 2009 4:47 am

I guess you already know that you can check the alexa website to know what is your internet traffic rank.
WUWT is right now the 34204 most visited website on the internet, 15110 most visited if you only count US visits.
To give a prespective, is ranked number 7. cnn number 52 is number 3350 and real climate cumber 107565 (booo)

September 26, 2009 4:49 am

Congratulations Anthony, I’m a long time lurker & ardent sceptic, I was trained as a physicist & then moved to the software world where I have worked on complex financial models, insanely complicated, but, at the end of the day, little more than guesswork – does that sound familiar 🙂 Anyway, i love the way you present often difficult information in a clear, succinct way.
Keep up the good work, I visit pretty much every day and look forward to you reaching the 30m mark.
PS. musn’t forget the mods, well done guys you are an example to all forums mods.

John Judge
September 26, 2009 5:24 am

History will record – Anthony Watts – one of the heros of the AGW fiasco.

Walter Cronanty
September 26, 2009 5:57 am

Congratulations! Thanks for all of your work. Wonderful site.

September 26, 2009 6:22 am

Sticking to the “fun”damentals is what does it, Anthony: posts on the fundamentals of sun spots, ENSO, ice at the poles, data gathering, etc; fun posts sprinkled in here and there on weather, AGW politics, and other non-climate topics.
Congratulations! May you see 20s of 20s more of 20×10**7 visits.
(Thanks to the mods. Your dedication is greatly appreciated. It does no good to see an interesting post, write a comment, and … nothing. But the moderation team at WUWT pretty much gets the comments added in near real time. Outstanding! )

Ken Hall
September 26, 2009 6:22 am

When the supporters of the alarmist line in the media will automatically reject information, data or conclusions solely based upon whether such data supports or contradicts AGW, and when the same media will only show critical data with the caveat that AGW continues regardless, then people are going to look for information based on the sound and time honoured rigours of scientific investigation and not based on the support of a political agenda.
People desire truth and are intelligent and discerning enough to choose for themselves. People flock to this site, because it is a pursuit of truth.
Major kudos to Anthony and his moderators and all the people who contribute with articles and comments to make this site the fountain of great information it is.
This is one of the three or four “must visit daily” blogs I make a particular effort to view.
Fight the good fight and never give up.
Thank you.

September 26, 2009 6:40 am

A FAQ/Climate Science for Dummies someone else mentioned upstream would be a good idea, organized by sections (Sea Ice, Solar, Temperature Records, Paleoclimatology) would be pretty cool. Cover stuff like “Why’s that jog in the sea ice record there at the same date every year?” “Why are we always talking about extent instead of volume?” “Why are we only comparing since 1979?” “What’s a proxy?” “What’s this UHI thingy?” etc etc

September 26, 2009 6:42 am

Oh, and a “Who’s Who” section to that would be killer too, both sides. There are only a few dozen particularly important personalities here (tho a few hundred interesting ones).
Anyway, congrats on the milestone!

September 26, 2009 6:49 am

And since I can hear Anthony thinking “thanks ever so much, Geo, for the heaping pile of work you just cheerfully chucked my way”, I can only say two things:
1. You asked!
2. Maybe a wiki with a limited number of editors to parcel it out?

September 26, 2009 6:53 am

Congratulations Anthony!
You know, it’s all due to the “positive feedbacks”.

September 26, 2009 6:56 am

microw (03:07:32) :
Congratulations Anthony from a member of “The Climate Sceptics” political party of Australia.
Your link was broken.
Well done Anthony.

September 26, 2009 6:56 am

Excuse me, Anthony, but have You done any computer modeling to verify these statistics?
Also, have You homogenized and adjusted the visiting statistics?
Ohterwise, how can You be sure that the positive trend is correct?
More seriously: Good work! Keep it up! 🙂
I have no idea what would make this site better, it’s pretty darned good as it is. 🙂

Steve in SC
September 26, 2009 7:03 am

Well done sir!!!
This site is a breath of fresh air (complete with CO2).
By your reasoned approach you have and continue to present the facts in a straight forward manner. When you have posted speculation you have labeled it as such and invited other ideas. You and your moderators have done a superb job in keeping the discourse civil and free of inflammatory rhetoric. Also congratulations should extend to your readership who seem to be a relatively educated group who while most are not trained in climate science are curious and are educating themselves on the science.
Perhaps an informal call for papers (informal of course) might be useful as the diverse readership seems to come up with many things that haven’t been thought of in quite that way. Faulty premises do tend to get dissected rather quickly by this group.
Again, congratulations to all on a job well done.

September 26, 2009 7:10 am

Congratulations! Your site here is just right to my eyes. I wouldn’t change a thing. Whenever there is something in an article that I don’t understand one of your commenters will usually post an explanation that causes that little light bulb in my head to blink on. I am learning so much that helps me to explain to family and friends that they really don’t know just how much of a snow job they’re getting from the gov’t and their affiliated media outlets. Your site is a valuable resource to home schoolers, too. You’re helping a lot of us teach our kids how and where to look for the answers for themselves, check sources, and figure things out for themselves. Thank you.

Steve Keohane
September 26, 2009 7:15 am

Congratulations Anthony and staff. Great Site!

Paul Coppin
September 26, 2009 7:16 am

Congratulations Anthony, kudos are certainly well deserved.
As to changes, not many to this blog, as has been said, don’t fix what ain’t broke.
New considerations: This readership base gives you strength for the following new project: to create the foremost online new professional science Journal with an entirely new set of rules and principles. You can redefine the ugly canard that is “peer-review” as it has always existed. You can demand availability of data, rigorous exposure of methodology. The published authors will know and be seen as having been “tested” for integrity, accuracy, “truth” in science. A journal in which the only agenda is integrity of the new knowledge, and its investigators.
A program to call for an international professional standard for the science PhD degree (and similar doctorates), similar to what exists for lawyers (well, better than that), medical doctors, professional engineers. A program where PhDs who publish spurious research with hidden agendas, falsified or misleading data, substandard methodology will be required to defend against the recall of their degree by their alma mater. There’s enough of this going on in important areas of influence that mere hope for professional integrity cannot obviously correct (as if it ever could).
Much can be done.

Steve (Paris)
September 26, 2009 7:36 am

I’ve lost count of the things I’ve learned through this site. Even went back and relearned basic algebra and calculus so I could keep up better with the more complicated posts. Am working hard to convince many friends and colleagues to go do some basic research on C0²=Warming, telling them to start here. Thank you Anthony and the moderators for being there.

Gene Nemetz
September 26, 2009 7:43 am

Mr Lynn (16:31:57) : After listening (in the car) to two NPR commentators lamenting the lack of agreement on a new ‘climate’ agreement for Copenhagen…
Part of me feels victory when reading that. But more of me feels sorry for them that they can’t see objectively.
p.s., wouldn’t it be nice to hear that Washington is doing budget cuts and has decided to stop sending money to PBS and NPR?

Gene Nemetz
September 26, 2009 7:46 am

WUWT is getting mentioned more in various articles. I still wish to see an ad for WUWT on the front page at Yahoo. 30,000,000 would come in less than 6 months then.

Roger Knights
September 26, 2009 7:49 am

what could WUWT do different or better?
If technically possible:
1. Allow guest editors (I suggest Lucy Skywalker & Pam Gray) to go through WUWT’s archives and highlight or flag the best 20% of the posts. This would make it easier for newcomers to get up to speed by reading the highlights of the skeptics’ position. There is a lot of filet on this site, but a lot of filler as well, which gets in the way.
2. Switch from a blog format to that of a forum, using forum software such as that provided by Invision. This would allow:
Better searching;
“View first unread post in thread” capability;
Automatic flagging of threads with new posts;
A topically organized & hierarchical table of contents of threads;
Ability to edit posts up to 45 minutes (say) after posting;
Numerous other bells and whistles.
3. Expand the number of currently active (clickable) threads in the right-hand pane, now that new threads are being added more frequently.
4. Append periods to the names of threads, so that the reader of the list of active threads can more easily tell where one item ends and the next begins. Alternatively, indent the first line, if possible.
5. Maybe bar certain hyper-political attribution-of-motive comments, such as those that characterize AWGism as nothing but a desire to tax and control or spread socialism, or as nothing but a nature-cult, because (regardless of the grain (or more) of truth such arguments contain) these comments make it easy for critics to characterize and dismiss WUWT as an expression of right-wing crankiness.

Pamela Gray
September 26, 2009 8:04 am

When I logged on, the advertisement right after your question regarding what you could do better was this: “Fight Global Warming”. If I had been the first poster, I would have posted this:
The funny part about that is that back in the dark ages (which we seem to have revisited as of late), hysterectomies were the standard treatment for female hysteria. So I think we should be promoting hysterectomies for women and …eh hem… for men who continue in chicken little’s path of warning that the sky is falling.

September 26, 2009 8:14 am

Congrats on the 20 million mark!
Man, take a look at Antarctica!
– Sea ice is at the 6th highest level in the last 31 years
– 4 of the highest sea ice extents occurred in the last 5 years.
– The 25-year trend is clearly upwards

September 26, 2009 8:35 am

Many thanks for WUWT.
Rarely do so many owe so much to so few 🙂
(Monthly donation time for this fan)

September 26, 2009 8:44 am

Congrats – I see a lot of parallels to your success and Fox. I’m pretty neutral politically, but I like to hear what ALL sides have to say. The mainstream media has treated the political right like they have AGW deniers – like they don’t exist and that their views are irrelevant. I listen to all of the media, because the truth is out there somewhere in the middle. You are a much needed voice in the wilderness and I wish you much continued success.

September 26, 2009 8:52 am

Congratulations Anthony.
I’m not sure how you can do better. 🙂
This site & the contributors have refined my ideas about AGW (or non-AGW) more in just the last couple yrs than all my ~25 yrs of studying it earlier.

September 26, 2009 8:52 am

and a Google page rank of 7!
Way to go!

September 26, 2009 8:58 am

Vincent (06:53:44) :
You know, it’s all due to the “positive feedbacks”.

September 26, 2009 9:05 am

I can already hear them thinking out loud over at RealClimate when the news of WUWT’s most recent milestone is announced:
“It’s worse than we thought.”
Thank you, Anthony. And no, I can’t think of any way to make the site better.

Fernando (in Brazil)
September 26, 2009 9:12 am

The Best.

Thomas J. Arnold.
September 26, 2009 9:22 am

Dedicated to seeking the truth.
All good lads and lasses, bless the lot of yer!
And sanity amongst the madness – thank you!
Chill out!!

Larry Hamlin
September 26, 2009 9:32 am

Congratulations Anthony!! You are helping in a very significant way toward winning the battle for truth about the phony and completely politically contrived AGW campaign.
The AGW effort is not about science but about government elitists and bureaucrats trying to control of our lives based on the big lie.
Keep up the great work!!

Hans Kelp
September 26, 2009 9:45 am

Congratulations to Anthony and his brilliant team. Considering that the Copenhagen Police here in Denmark at this very moment are busy breaking up a violent group of people trying to enter into Amagerværket, a power station at Amager, Copenhagen, with the declared purpose of shutting down the power station because of its side production of CO2, just proves to me that sites like WUWT are an absolutely neccessity and a blessing. I´m especially impressed by the level of diversity of articles and also of the language used herein which I´m sure will help convey some badly needed common sense to most people. Brilliant site.

Ryan Welch
September 26, 2009 9:50 am

Congratulations Anthony!
This is my favorite site for solid science and discussion of the current golbal warming/climate change debate. It would be hard to improve but maybe you could add some topical running discussion pages. Regardless you have done more to clarify this debate than any other site IMHO.

Ryan Welch
September 26, 2009 9:58 am

Paul Coppin, you have a great idea with having a new peer-review scientific journal. Just as the internet is replacing newspapers and the MSM so too we need to replace the old so-called peer-reviewed journals.

Rick K
September 26, 2009 10:23 am

Anthony, mods, contributors, posters…
Congratulations and thank you for a great site that I visit multiple times daily.
I have an AGW-believing relative that thinks “only climatologists can understand climate.”
I have learned at least two things here at WUWT:
a) ANYBODY can stay abreast of current climate happenings and learn so much by tuning into WUWT
b) NOBODY understands climate!
We’re all in this together, Anthony. Thank you so much for your efforts!
I just wish we could make the politicians in Washington check this site daily.
Hmmm… maybe I’ll send my representatives a note with a link…
Carry on!

September 26, 2009 11:25 am

Congratulations, Mr. Watts! The milestone is well deserved. WUWT is my favorite climate blog, a site of economically, politically and morally uncorrupted science, and one of a decreasing number of voices of reason in today’s world; science as it should be. Thank you for the important work!

Sam the Skeptic
September 26, 2009 11:30 am

Well done, and just keep on doing what you do best. We can’t all be wrong, can we?
Flanagan, come on, stand tall. Congratulate the man even if you don’t agree with him!

F. Ross
September 26, 2009 12:26 pm

Ric Werme (22:58:13) :
How about ? 🙂

Your post [resources comment 65319] is indeed a good one and one to which I have referred several times and to which I have referred others. You may recall I once mentioned that I had to go to the page source to see how you did it.
What I had in mind with my suggestion above [F. Ross (21:58:22) : ] was nothing earthshaking, but to have on the WUWT Resources page a few permanent html tags links [or a summation of your tags info] under, say, the Other Data section.

Alexej Buergin
September 26, 2009 1:12 pm

Numbering comments, quoting other comments (automatically in a different font) and formatting like “Climate Audit” (but does it always work there?).
The possibility to jump directly to today’s comments, especially in “Tips and Notes”.

Larry Sheldon
September 26, 2009 2:49 pm

OT, kindasorta (well, this IS the place to get abnswers!
The SOHO page at NASA has been down for several days. Does somebody here know why? Recent sunspots knock it out?

September 26, 2009 3:22 pm

Felicidades Anthony,
a reference blog, without any doubt, with your little place in my blog, of course.

Peter Plail
September 26, 2009 3:23 pm

In adding my congratulations, may I say that you are too modest – I would suggest rather than a small milestone it is in fact a [snipping} great signpost to climate common sense.
It is heartening to see that people are increasingly looking for answers to the questions being asked here every day. It is sad to see so little reasoned argument being contributed by proponents of AGW.
In response to your request for things to add, can I suggest a sidebar link to Antarctic ice coverage below the Arctic sea ice one.
My thanks for the immense effort put into this site by you and your team.

September 26, 2009 3:50 pm

Ultimately I think that we should launch a wiki about global warming/climate change/climate science that takes all the information posted over the past three years as blog posts and make it a reference on climate science that is based on peer reviewed, publicly refereed data that is open and transparent in all the raw material and data that goes into it.

Britannic no-see-um
September 26, 2009 3:53 pm

Congratulations, well deserved. The main problem I have is finding archive posts by topic other than a punt in the search box.

Larry Sheldon
September 26, 2009 3:55 pm

Good idea Mile Lorrey.
When can you start?

Kum Dollison
September 26, 2009 5:09 pm

Congratulations, Anthony, and the Mods (sounds like a singing group, now?)
Seriously, Great Job. And, Thanks.

Kum Dollison
September 26, 2009 5:10 pm

Should have been: (sounds like a singing group, no?)
Anyway, Thanks, again.

September 26, 2009 5:16 pm

Congrats Anthony and mods! It proves that if you build a better blog the world will tap (on a keyboard) a path to your door. I tap in to WUWT at least twice a day.
As for improvements, I wouldn’t mind a book review section. I have read a few books dispelling the notion of AGW and I’d like to read more. There are so many books though that it’s hard to choose. I don’t want to rehash the same information in another book and I don’t want a book whose science is so high above my head that I have no hope understanding it.
Contributors could briefly state the outline of the book, how scientifically educated a reader needs to be (i.e. it’s suitable for high school students, science graduates, Nobel laureates etc), how pleasant it is to read (does it read easily or is it like a dry textbook) and if it contributes anything new to the discussion. These and other features of a book could be written up by WUWT readers and hence introduce enquiring minds to more information. The success of WUWT demonstrates there are many intelligent minds out there looking for truth without spin or psycho-babble.
LilacWine, the bookworm 🙂

David Ball
September 26, 2009 5:23 pm

David Hagen, you have to stop with the peak oil BS (bad science) . It is sad and unprovable. Get over yourself. Paul Erlich was wrong, and so are you.

September 26, 2009 5:46 pm

Many thanks and congrats Mr. Watts and Co. This is an excellent web site.
LilacWine (17:16:03) said :
“As for improvements, I wouldn’t mind a book review section. I have read a few books dispelling the notion of AGW and I’d like to read more. There are so many books though that it’s hard to choose. I don’t want to rehash the same information in another book and I don’t want a book whose science is so high above my head that I have no hope understanding it.”
I agree and would appreciate a book review section too as I struggle understanding complex scientific writing.

Larry Sheldon
September 26, 2009 6:00 pm

“Link to both the IPCC and NIPCC publications under Resources.”
Those would have to be under resinks, would they?
Reply: I like joke grenades. Tick…Tick…Tick…….Boom ~ charles the moderator

September 26, 2009 6:33 pm

> Now just six months later, I’m amazed again…
I’m not surprised you get so many hits. You’re an oasis of sanity in a desert of mindless hysteria and intellectual dishonesty.
Congratulations, and don’t do anything differently.

September 26, 2009 6:59 pm

CONGRATS Anthony and non-Hockey Team!
The case against “consensus” can be summer in three legs:
First, original (or raw) unadjusted data do not support a case for alarm. Or that AGW is the most relevant explanation for climate change. Instead, nothing appears to support it.
Second, all the falsifying evidence supports non-AGW explanation. How do consensus scientists deny natural cliamte change?
Third, the most sensational stories and “studies” almost always result from cherry-picking of the evidence. The worst and yet still most prominent are “Hockey Sticks.”
When we can all put a stick in that last villain, our work will be done.

Ray Boorman
September 26, 2009 7:39 pm

Great site Anthony, but some improvements could be made.
1) I get peeved seeing people copy into their post whole paragraphs from earlier posts, which all of us have already seen. Such duplication is a waste of time for readers. Could you enforce a rule where this is banned? Surely its not impossible for posters to just include the name & date/time of earlier post. This would save frustration for pedantic people like me. Implementation would be easy – just delete the whole comment, with an explanation, & over time people will change their ways when they don’t get to see their stuff on the web.
I am in Australia, & look at this site often, usually when you guys are tucked up in bed. I will volunteer to perform the edits/moderating, if you needed extra manpower to get it done.
2) What about numbering posts like Steve does on CA? See point 1.
3) There seems to be an excess of mindless comments & sniping at others here. Too many people engaging their keyboard before their brain. Again, I would like to see much of the dross filtered out by the moderators. I can get my fill of rubbish in lots of places, & come here for intelligent, thought provoking comment, not that. This site would be more attractive to “Team” members to reply to criticisms, hopefully, if the sniping was not allowed.

Lindsay H.
September 26, 2009 8:59 pm

You are providing a valuable service; and deserve public recognition for that service.
I hope you have copyrighted an appropriate logo for WUWT it might have value in the future.
I can see marketing opportunities for labelled products, we would like the opportunity to compete with the flood of Greenpeace et al. inspired pro AGW propaganda logos.
What can WUWT do better :
Get wordpress to number the posts on a topic, making it easier to trace an argument.

Graeme Rodaughan
September 26, 2009 10:06 pm

It’s about time that WUWT invented some new math to deal with extreme numbers of hits – normal math just won’t cut it anymore…

September 26, 2009 10:50 pm

what could WUWT do different or better? A small request (I hope). I prefer to read on paper but have to select print preview and subtract 6 from the last page number to remove the picture links from the right hand column. Any chance this can be fixed in the style sheet? I don’t have to do this with SteveM’s site.
Other than that, congratulations and thanks to you all. WUWT reminds me every day what is so attractive about science – rational explanations for the universe we live in. It’s so sad to see science turned into a politicized, rent seeking occupation.
You are an island of sanity in a crazy world and I thank you with all my heart.

Allan M
September 27, 2009 2:06 am

Ee by gum, lad, tha’s doin’ a reet grand job ‘ere. Tha’s getten a reet gradely site, an’ we reckon tha’ll meck 30 million i’ no time. Keep it up.
Translation from Lancashire to English:
By Jove Sir, you are doing a frightfully fine job here. You have an awfully fine site, and we estimate that you will achieve 30 million very soon. Maintain your present direction.
(I hate to think what Lancashire dialect would sound like in an American accent. And how would you {snip} it?)
Keep up the great work!
Reply: Teur. we doa wee best despi’ t’ ‘orrible wukkin conditions, lack o’ pay, ‘n neya respect we suffa everee day. ~ charles t’ moderator

September 27, 2009 3:06 am

David Ball (17:23:34) : David Hagen, you have to stop with the peak oil BS (bad science) . It is sad and unprovable. Get over yourself. Paul Erlich was wrong, and so are you.
David, usually I agree with you. But this time I don’t, precisely for the reason that, if Peak Oil is bad science (which I don’t doubt at least in parts) I want the space to discern for myself and separate the good and bad details. This kind of space is what WUWT provides.
But if possible, I don’t want to look at Peak Oil issues until I see real Science being reinstated by the science organizations and publications – signalled by admissions of past errors of attitude in foreclosing debate and encouraging alarmism, and by specifically reaching out towards those they have scorned.

Mark Young
September 27, 2009 7:22 am

I’m here because I’m learning almost every day. I’m amused almost as often too. That’s a winning combination. I find this to be a very fair minded, civil, and voluminous discussion of complex issues. Thank you very much for creating it.

September 27, 2009 7:32 am

A hearty congratulations on reaching this amazing milestone. Long may you continue.

September 27, 2009 7:53 am

The reason you have achieved such growth in your site hits is that you have provided an oasis in the desert of nonsense. And people need to drink.

September 27, 2009 8:14 am

Thanks and congratulations to Anthony and all the team. I’m relatively new to WUWT and I can’t tell you how valuable I have found it. It is really helpful and balanced. Apart from presenting the facts and holding others in the scientific and wider community to acocunt, you are striking a blow for real science in the face of the corrosions and corruptions that are occurring due to the politicisation of science and the growth of vested interests. There seems to be a dangerous and growing tendenacy for scientists to take the public at large for fools and sadly all too often they fall for it based upon fear and the endless propaganda of impending doom. Well done and keep it up.

David Ball
September 27, 2009 9:22 am

Lucy, I usually agree with you as well, and I do this time too. This issue however is as tainted as the climate debate. The real science is smothered by the propaganda. The main problem I have is how do we know we have reached Peak if we have no idea what remains?

September 27, 2009 12:02 pm

David Ball (09:22:30) :

Gene Nemetz
September 27, 2009 2:53 pm

Lucy Skywalker (12:02:30) :
David Ball (09:22:30) :
I know there’s a lot of it in Alaska. Flooding the US market with that oil would alleviate some of the economic pressure right now. 🙂
Back on topic :
I’m happy for Anthony and WUWT. I wish everyone was aware of this web site. Maybe an ad in Yahoo would cause a crash from so many hits. But that’s a good kind of crash.

September 27, 2009 6:47 pm

Congratulations Anthony and moderators. You have achieved what so many academics have despaired over – you are bridging the divide between scientists and non-scientists and helping to re-engage non-specialists in debate over fundamental scientific issues! (Perhaps not in the way, however, that the “elites” would prefer). I’m one of the new 10,000,000 – and have been an addict ever since I first linked in about 4 months ago. Thanks for the sanity you help bring to this crazy “finished” debate. As for improving your website, I like the idea of indexing the topics, because as a science historian I think WUWT is going to be of very great interest to those who are trying to reconstruct what has happened to science in this era. Fantastic work!

Gene Nemetz
September 27, 2009 9:08 pm

Now my most important question: what could WUWT do different or better?
– Anthony

More guest posts from Bill Illis, Roy Spencer, and what about Fred Singer? I think Bill Illis has more to offer than he realizes.
Secondly—I wish WUWT would advertise at hot websites.
Oh, and thirdly, how about WUWT t-shirts and bumper stickers?

September 28, 2009 4:10 am

vigilantfish (18:47:23) :
My second post here but vigiliantfish’s suggestion of archiving WUWT [ plus Climate Audit plus a couple of other prominent blogs ] is an essential requirement for historians to pore over in the decades and even perhaps centuries ahead.
I assume that all of the WUWT postings are still in an electronic archive format held somewhere on the net.
The electronic medium and electronic links and systems now used may alter very substantially over the next few decades and subsequently vast amounts of today’s data and history may be permanently lost.
As WUWT now holds such a prominent position and holds increasing amounts of information and data on the moderate skeptic’s side of the Global Warming / Climate Change debate, consideration should be given to placing the entire past, current and future WUWT proceedings onto a very long lasting and totally self contained and completely independent data storage medium that will still be accessible and translatable long into the future.
That way there will always be another viewpoint and another view of the sequence of events on the Great Global Warming debate for future historians to ponder over and as an alternative viewpoint to overwhelming propaganda of the warmists.
We owe it to future generations to preserve the history of the past and present for without history the human race has no past to build the future on.

September 28, 2009 8:34 am

Congratulations from NW Italy!
Every 5 min I stay here, I can collect publications, links and data I need a full week to study it.
I’m learning really a lot of things about climatology, meteorology and SCIENCE.
Thanks to Antony and to all the crew here ad WUWT.

September 28, 2009 9:52 am

Yes, the WUWT site takes up too much of my day too. But better that than spending a bunch of money and time on a shrink to deal with my anxiety about just how wrong the warmists are. You give all of us hope, Anthony. You take care of yourself, because there are a lot of people depending on you.

Tim Clark
September 28, 2009 12:33 pm

Although I’m trying to wean myself a tad, the addiction just gets worse. Congratulations Anthony and the gang.

September 28, 2009 2:40 pm

This is likely the 212th comment to this post. The 10^7 post garnered 103. That seems appropriate, though I caution applying any sort of statistical analysis to those figures!

Larry Sheldon
September 28, 2009 3:12 pm

Looking at Climate Audit today, Ric Werme, it looks to me like yiou should be able to write a book, buy a crane, do TV programs, and get a Nobel Prize with your two numbers.

Larry Sheldon
September 28, 2009 3:14 pm

I’m trying to remember, how long after the last global [warming|cooling] panic shown irrevocably to be nonsense was before the folks shut up about it?

%d bloggers like this:
Verified by MonsterInsights