Last month I was surprised to find WUWT broke the 2 million hits barrier.
This month, it’s worse than we thought:
Just another effect of Climategate.
In other news, some other websites didn’t appear to benefit from the Climategate “bump”.
From Alexa.com
As always, I say I could not have done this alone. My sincere thanks to the many contributors, and moderators Charles, DB, and Evan. Of course, let’s not forget all the readers and commenters. Truly a global village we have here.
The growth rate appears a bit steep, Anthony. Since when did the AGM-ists start doing your PR?
Sorry OT but indeed relevant :
http://sidc.oma.be/products/ri/
SIDC has released its update of the Provisional International monthly mean Sunspot Number, and for November it is 4.2 (the same as September).
This is strange because the unofficial, accumulated value based on the Boulder (NOAA/SWPC) sunspot number, reached 7.7 ( Higher than Sept or Oct).
Perhaps it has to do with the fact that November saw a flurry of Tiny Tims, not real spots.
This brings the total number of months in a row with smoothed sunspot number below 5 to 20 months… quite an achievement.
Andrew (07:12:04) :
The BBC piece is more diversion, ala Monbiot. The real meat is in some of the excellent comments, many taking BBC to task for their re-(mis)-direction.
Just typed in ‘climategate’ into google and got 108,000,000 listings. Bing is at 49,900,000.
I’m not sure what happened in August? Were you not tempted to hide the decline?
Where’s the smoothed, massaged curve. I no longer trust raw data, I need to have a ‘value-added’ computational layer before giving that chart any credence.
In fact, when your done processing a new graph, you should probably just delete that raw data. That’s the only way to ensure that your not confusing or misleading anyone with needless details.
Anthony,
You’re not the only one.
I happened to get caught up in the harry_read_me.txt analysis.
I continue to post a link to each new article you write.
Congratulations.
Steve
Oh dear.
Last time I noticed there were claimed to be 250,000 people whose jobs were based on the hypothesis of AGW. Seems like there’s going to be a lot more unemployed people in future.
Congrats to Anthony and the moderators on their work.
My once daily visit has become 3 times a day at least. I feel certain my wife thinks I’m visiting pornography sites; but she’s the computer expert in the family and knows I’m not.
Anthony,
I’m working on a new smoothing algorithm to hide the blip.
🙂
Basil
You got a hockey stick with real raw data alone without having to “adjust”, “re-adust”, and fudge?
Amazing!
Let me echo Barry’s great compliment:
Thanks for keeping the science honest.
However, my peer reviewed analysis of your increase in hits, clearly shows it correlated to the recent increase (with an appropriate lag effect) to CO2 levels.
Q: How many climate scientists does it take to change a light bulb?
A: None.
There’s a consensus that it’s going to change, so they’ve decided to keep us in the dark.
From Salty Dog December 1, 09 10:04 AM
There’s a hidden story in those numbers.
What’s really impressive are the October numbers. Look at that jump — and all before Climategate hit.
Congratulations! I have been reading this site since about April 2008.
Anyway, can I ask you to provide me the raw data and methods behind this impressing graph?
REPLY: Sure, just send a communications to wordpress.com support and ask for it. They have it all and it is automatically generated by WordPress in my dashboard. – A
evanmjones (16:16:44) :
There’s a hidden story in those numbers.
What’s really impressive are the October numbers. Look at that jump — and all before Climategate hit.
tallbloke (08:21:28) :
The most impresive thing is that ratings were soaring even before climategate hit.
Well done everyone!
——————————
My thoughts exactly Evan. 🙂
See, I told you in September you had a shot at 30 million hits by the end of the year.
My only complaint is that with a dozen articles being posted per day I can just barely read them all (some days I find I missed a few, especially if I skipped even one day for any reason…) and skim some of the comments. It is no longer possible to have an extended conversation in time (as things roll off the bottom of the article list so quickly.)
On the plus side, the Trolls seem to be quite missing in the flood, having been washed away in any given thread by the torrent of events lately…
So: Congratulations! (But with fond memories of when it was just our private little getaway spot where a few friends could meet for drinks, discussion, and sceenry… )
Last time I noticed there were claimed to be 250,000 people whose jobs were based on the hypothesis of AGW. Seems like there’s going to be a lot more unemployed people in future.
Wait ’til you see the list of website names up for sale…
Anthony,
That’s Holy hockey sticks, BATMAN!