Al Gore says "Denialists in Denial"

http://static.algore.com/i/als_journal.jpg

From Al Gore’s Journal:

Denialists in Denial April 27, 2010 : 4:52 PM

Last week The Wall Street Journal published a ridiculous op-ed titled “Climate Science in Denial” claiming that “global warming alarmists have been discredited, but you wouldn’t know it from the rhetoric this Earth Day.”

Marc Ambinder of The Atlantic does an exceptional job dismantling this ridiculous claim:

“Actually, the subhead should be revised: “Global warming denialists have been re-discredited, but you wouldn’t know it from the rhetoric in today’s Wall Street Journal.” Far be it from me, a non-scientist, to dispute the scientific expertise of an MIT professor of meteorology, Richard Lindzen, but then again, Lindzen’s selective recitation of the litany of arguments against global warming practically begs a rebuttal.”

“First, he mentions “Climate Gate” — those e-mails from the Climate Research Unit from the University of East Anglia. He suggests that the e-mails show “unambiguous evidence of the unethical suppression of information and opposing viewpoints, and even data manipulation.””

“The e-mails were actually quite ambiguous and contained evidence of churlishness and defensiveness from scientists whose data had long been under attack from climate denialists.”

Much of the media has done a particularly bad job covering the climate crisis. Instead of informing the public about the facts, they have treated the issue as if the same political divisions they exuberantly cover also exist in the scientific community. They don’t.

===========================

Hmmm, well Al Baby, here’s something to deny:

click for live stats - note: this is RANK not traffic volume

Do you think many people are reading your message on algore.com?

UPDATE: Willis Eschenbach writes in comments:

Well, I took Anthony’s Alexa Rating graph forwards, viz:

WUWT is the top of the heap, twice as good as the one in second place. (Sc) means a sceptical site, (Mid) is middle of the road, and (AGW) is AGW supporters. And Al? Well, at least he beat Tamino …

Advertisements

144 thoughts on “Al Gore says "Denialists in Denial"

  1. So at first I was confused by the graph…it looked to be upside down just like the AGW crowd has done! Then I realized that it was ranking, not traffic/time. Any way you can put a y-axis label on it?
    Also, the log scale makes the comparison particularly hilarious…but what’s the deal with the spike up for Gore and down for WUWT in mid-Feb?
    -Scott

  2. Al – crawl back under your rock.
    The only fools that believe in your … stuff … are your fellow politicians, scientists on the gravy train, and businesses lined up to profit from gov’t programs & subsidies.

  3. Anthony,
    Delete this if I’m reading the chart wrong but shouldn’t the 5,000 be at the bottom and the 100,000 at the top?
    REPLY: No.

  4. Al Gore started out to be a preacher and he ended up being a preacher. He just changed religions. He probably started out by ranting about people who denied Christ.

  5. Al’s previous day’s comment:
    State of Climate Legislation April 26, 2010 : 3:45 PMA statement from the Alliance for Climate Protection and other groups:
    “Everyday the Senate fails to pass clean energy and climate legislation we put our economy, our national security and our environment at greater risk. Americans are demanding the millions of jobs, energy independence, and clean air and water comprehensive legislation can deliver. Inaction is too costly, and the challenge is too urgent.”
    “The tireless work of Senators Kerry, Graham and Lieberman is proof positive that bipartisan success is well within reach. The House has passed historic legislation; now it is time for the Senate and the White House to stay focused and finish the job. The moment is ours. Now is the time for our leaders to act.”
    Who wants to be Al’s Babysitter….his diaper is always getting full.

  6. Where’s Algore?
    Oh, I see … two little blue blips just above the cutoff line at 100,000 …
    Had to use tweezers and a magnifying glass to find it (his ranking).
    .
    .

  7. “The e-mails were actually quite ambiguous and contained evidence of churlishness and defensiveness from scientists whose data had long been under attack from climate denialists.”
    I wonder how much time Al has spent pouring over the details of these emails? As much time as someone like, oh I don’t know… Steve Mc?

  8. Anthony,
    Gore says, “Far be it from me, a non-scientist, to dispute the scientific expertise of an MIT professor of meteorology, Richard Lindzen, but then again, Lindzen’s selective recitation of the litany of arguments against global warming practically begs a rebuttal.”
    Does this mean that the inventor of the internet is prepared to break with his own long standing policy and debate the issue with Dr. Lindzen? I’d love to see it, if only it were true.
    I’d post the challenge on his site but I don’t want to impact his “extraordinary” blog rankings! 😉

  9. “If we’re going to deal with the problem, we’re probably going to experience some pain, and we’re going to have to figure out the best way to distribute that pain so that it can best be tolerated.”
    – Marc Ambinder; politics editor of The Atlantic
    Why does this need to be painful?

  10. Ummm… Well first of all I am a skeptic and not a Denialist. I do not say that AGW cannot be occurring only that the evidence for it to date is lackluster. It requires denying that the MWP occurred and accepting the fact that an increase in Carbon Dioxide is the ONLY reason the globe is currently ‘warming’. It also requires that I accept the use of proxy data and an obfuscation of temperature data that does a poor job of reconstructing a single global variable temperature ( not blaming the scientist really except for their dogged determination to say what they have done is right without question ) .
    I may be shown in another year or so that CO2 really is the cause of Global Warming, however until a link other then correlation can be facilitated is it not proper for me to be skeptical? I have seen many ‘signs’ of global warming touted. The ice caps melting ( well they froze again ), The glaciers are melting ( well some of them and oh by the way they have been melting since at least the end of the little ice age ), Hurricanes ( ummm hmmmm ) In High school I was told that by 2005 the plain states would be barren deserts!!! ( No lie, my teacher actually had a video that made that claim!!! I wish I could remember what it was called ) So I am skeptical when people tell me there is AGW occurring.
    Also I cannot believe that even if AGW was occurring it would mean all bad things that seem to be claimed. Hence I am skeptical of those end result claims. Is there no good to come from a warmer globe? No increase in food production? No increase in drinking water as a more active hydrosphere occurs? Honestly NOTHING good from a warmer planet? Heck at the very least would not a warmer planet not make it a little easier to generate power from water as the base temperature of water will be raised a little? Ever closer to changing to its gaseous state?
    Anyway just my take on being a Denialist… Or whatever you call someone who does not believe something just because an Appeal to Authority argument is used. What do they call an argument when you prove your point by calling others stupid?

  11. John from CA at 5:01 PM:
    It is Rank not Volume, so the lower the number, the higher the rank. That is why the 5,000 is at the top and 100,000 at the bottom – where Algore dwells!!!
    HAHAHA

  12. The more the catastrophic anthropogenic global warming narrative unwinds the more the denier label becomes infused with irony. I can see a time not long from now, Al Gore shivering in a federal prison cell, swearing that the whole world must be crazy for not seeing the incontrovertible truth in his head.
    Buckle up Al, it’s going to be a rough ride back to reality…

  13. Hard, honest efforts just pay off and succeed.
    Tells a lot about the quality both sides deliver
    and cannot be supressed.
    But wait, isn’t Mr. Ex-Vice-and-then-almost.president Al Gore right when complaining that sceptics get much more attention ?

  14. Am also confused by the chart ….. maybe I’m just being stupid but it looks as though Al is geting >100,000 most of the time. occassionally dropping below …. ….. whereas WUWT is steady between 10,000 and 20,000.
    Sorry for being picky but either I’m too stupid or its just an appalling chart.

  15. Doktor Gore is a very funny fellow, even if he doesn’t intend to be.
    Nice graph. So out of the top 200,000 sites, according to Alexa, WUWT is ~15,539 and Al Gore is ranked ~189,087. Google, Facebook, and YouTube are the top three.

  16. Al gore gets 100,000 hits a day? Nope, I read it again.
    I checked Alexa, and that’s Al Gore.com’s ranking.
    So Al Baby gets 189,000 rank, and WattsUpWith That ranks 15,500 or
    a full dozen times better than Al.
    Maybe algore is a bit sore.
    Gee, that’s really swell.

  17. Ambinder’s “exceptional dismantling” is the usual alarmist rebuttal. The format is amazingly consistent and almost always boils down to “Everyone who agrees with me says you’re wrong”. The implication is that that “everyone” is nearly universal, but if any citations are offered for reference they all seem to come from the same 20-30 people.

  18. Congratulations on the impressive trouncing of Al’s site Anthony.
    Al’s inability to deal with, or even discuss, facts is undiminished. (He is probably still basking in the glow of only just losing to W).
    But back in the world of smart world leaders, looks like Merkel (who is a PhD level physicist) has realized that the ‘consensus’ is overbought.
    http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/0,1518,691194,00.html
    Bailing out Greece, Portugal, Spain, and Britain will be distasteful, but topping up Goldman Sachs’ coffers with carbon credit Greengeld would be very un-Germanic.

  19. Boy, does Al’s site rank highly. Then again, even liberals don’t like the guy. Kinda sad.

  20. your chart is very impressive, anthony ; unfortunately, there are a lot of people who do not understand the difference between ordinal and cardinal numbers. perhaps a graph showing the average numbers of hits per week would make it clearer for many. keep up the good work ; it is much appreciated.

  21. plus 1 hit from me to check the Al reference.
    “Much of the media has done a particularly bad job covering the climate crisis. Instead of informing the public about the facts, they have treated the issue as if the same political divisions they exuberantly cover also exist in the scientific community. They don’t.”
    Al Gore
    It’s an interesting point in time. WUWT has done an outstanding job of debunking the “facts” from the point “Global Warming” turned into “Climate Change”.
    In all fairness to a news media that rarely spends on research, how can they keep up with “facts” when “AGW ‘Climate’ Story Tellers” muddy the waters and constantly change a “Science” debate?
    It is a shame Al doesn’t drop in more often for a chat?
    Respectfully,
    John from CA

  22. The statement that Gore makes concerning the lack of politics in the climate change community is blatantly false and misleading. It is quite the opposite — and anyone that has set foot in a college town or campus could tell you.
    “Much of the media has done a particularly bad job covering the climate crisis. Instead of informing the public about the facts, they have treated the issue as if the same political divisions they exuberantly cover also exist in the scientific community. They don’t.”
    It is quite comical for Democrats to criticize the media — who have been in their pocket for generations.

  23. It’s a little known fact that Al not only invented the internet, but he also invented the door knocker. Thus he was legimately awarded his “no bell” prize.
    Face it. He’s no ding-a-ling. There’s money in them thar’ carbon credits if’n he can git cap and trade to fly.

  24. @ImranCan
    I think Anthony does this just to test our attention to detail. Under the graph, faded to almost an unreadable extent, you’ll see this, “click for live stats – note: this is RANK not traffic volume”…………. It catches many of us.
    Will Lindzen respond? I truly hope so. I really enjoy how this could play out……but, but, I thought we were suppose to blindly believe “scientists”!!!!! Now what? Does a MIT PhD top a Penn St.(did I get that right?) PhD? Where does a satellite temp tracker PhD fit? And does a resigned PhD across the pond count at all? What a quandary!!! Which scientist to blindly believe……oh I wish they’d come to a consensus!!! Way easier than thinking for myself.

  25. Al Gore’s Weather (AGW): Ah like mah sauerkraut sour like Germans make it real sour.
    Another AGW Fraud bites the dust; Germany chokes on Al’s AGW sauerkraut.
    More, please; and, faster.
    …-
    “Copenhagen Fallout
    [Germany] Merkel Abandons Aim of Binding Climate Agreement
    Frustrated by the climate change conference in December, German Chancellor Angela Merkel is quietly moving away from her goal of a binding agreement on limiting climate change to 2 degrees Celsius. She has also sent out signals at the EU level that she no longer supports the idea of Europe going it alone.
    “I have three children,” German Environment Minister Norbert Röttgen said during a speech in Berlin last week, as he ventured to explain why climate policy still remains important after December’s failed summit in Copenhagen. He said that a maximum rise in temperature of 2 degrees Celsius “is the highest amount that we can still tolerate, because beyond that life will no longer be possible as we know it.”
    Currently the prospects are not so good that his children will enjoy a life that remains unchanged. True, starting this weekend, the German government will attempt to rekindle international efforts to save the Earth’s climate as it hosts a conference at the Petersberg Hotel near Bonn. But, at the same time, German Chancellor Angela Merkel has now decided to change the course of her climate policy.
    As recently as last December she said: “If we don’t succeed in limiting global warming to 2 degrees, then the costs of the resulting damages will be many times higher than what we now, with a change in our lifestyle, can achieve.”
    Now it’s a different story: Merkel will no longer endeavor to contractually implement the 2-degree target — in other words, to reach a legally binding agreement with specific reductions in greenhouse gas emissions. She doesn’t want to be snubbed again because she has realized that important countries won’t lend their support the next time around either. This was confirmed two weeks ago at the nuclear summit in Washington by Chinese President Hu Jintao and Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh.
    The Limits of Germany’s Influence
    Germany now has to acknowledge the limits of its influence. The country’s climate policy was an attempt to play a leadership role on the grand stage. But the others didn’t follow suit. On paper they praise the objective, but they are not prepared to do more than make vague promises. The only way forward, it seems, is by taking side roads. But even there the Chinese and the Indians won’t simply trot along behind the Germans.
    On the domestic front, this threatens to bring down the great symbol of Germany’s efforts to remodel society in line with a climate-friendly lifestyle and mode of production. If Merkel is no longer fighting on the international stage to achieve the 2-degree target, how does she intend to convince her fellow Germans that they have to change anything? A domestic temperature target would be absurd.”
    http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/0,1518,691194,00.html
    http://www.smalldeadanimals.com/archives/013874.html

  26. Sigh! lalalalalalalla Sigh! lalalallalalallala Sigh!
    That’s all I got by reading Gore’s website.

  27. It is very hot in algore’s world. What with his complete lack of knowledge of heat transfer (not to mention the boys at CRU) and the several millions of degrees in the interior of the earth.

  28. Just wondered if anyone knows where Real Climate and Bishop Hill feature on the same scales?

  29. Hrm, an advocate that is profiting greatly from his own advocacy… speaking from experience here – if he was an oil company executive, environmentalists would dismiss his statements (at best) or publicly rake him over the coals (at worst). Quite the double-standard there, I think.

  30. Progress is being made!
    If you look at the link to the Atlantic Journal (which Al claims “does an exceptional job dismantling this ridiculous claim”) we find the following two quotes:
    “One can agree that global warming advocates can be alarmist, that they can hype the negative effects of the less conservative models, and that they can often present their conclusions with more certainty than is warranted.”
    And
    “The science should not dictate policy. But it should be a foundation for policy. Whether that means “cap and trade” or “cap and dividend” or carbon taxes, or whether we should spin the roulette wheel and hope the temperature predictions get it wrong — *those are legitimate questions to debate*, and there are many potential answers.”
    The irony for me is that there is no way those two quotes (especially the first) would have appeared in such an article without the sunshine of climategate…
    jsc

  31. There is a reason he only got Cs in business school. If it were not for Daddy Gore’s money from Armand Hammer, he would be licking flaps in a bucket shop boiler room operation trying to get clients.

  32. Funny Gore blaming the media for the coverage, just because a tiny sliver of it is going against him at the moment.
    Fact is,most of the mainstream media pay very little attention to skeptics except to paint the movement as tinfoil hat wearing Luddites obsessing over minutae in a few emails. Gore and his movement are treated like the Dalai Lama sent to lead us kicking and screaming to his “promised land” …” if only we’d act now!”
    Sorry, Mr Non Scientist. I know you want to be the world’s Pied Piper while you make billions trading carbon credits on behalf of an unknowing public who treat you as a Messiah. But reality has a funny way of biting you in the butt sometimes.The science is far from settled, and I only hope enough holes can be punched in this balloon before any serious legislation gets passed.

  33. I can’t help but wonder if those blips in Gore’s ranking are related to posts on this site. Wouldn’t it be ironic if his rankings boosts all came from WATT’s readers?

  34. For those wondering about the spikes that makes the Gore graph even register — I believe you can correlate them to mentions his site gets here at WUWT. Check back in a few days and you’ll probably find a spike from today’s post. About the only hits he gets are from business partners, immediate family members and WUWT readers moseying by for a good chuckle.

  35. “Far be it from me, a non-scientist,”
    Yep, you’re right, it’s very far from you.

  36. “The e-mails were actually quite ambiguous and contained evidence of churlishness and defensiveness from scientists whose data had long been under attack from climate denialists.”
    Ya, putting segments of differing graphs together piecemeal into one graph and presenting that graph as if it came from one data set, ya, that’s ambiguous, ‘standard practice’, nothing to see there.

  37. Can we stop legitimizing the guy by paying attention to him? Unless he does something of true significance, I’m personally uninterested in dedicating any blog space to him. And bashing him is so easy it isn’t even sporting. Of course, that’s just my two cents and this isn’t my blog.

  38. The ClimateGate emails are just as damaging to AGW & Company as the Goldman-Sachs emails.
    Flip on the news, and if you’ve read the ClimateGate emails, you’ve heard the Goldman-Sachs emails.

  39. I second the call for a debate between Al Gore and Richard Lindzen. It would be epic to watch Gore get dismantled and shown for the charlatan that he is.

  40. Yeah Al, and I was digging through your site and found a link to your “Current TV” under “Al’s Projects”. Evidently this is one of your top scientific “fact” stories for today…
    Noah’s Ark Found!
    I especially like the part about the Marine Engine Label plaque listing 1347 HP and the 1347 horses they found. Is this why your acts so weird in respect of science?

  41. Maybe there are some hanging chads that haven’t been counted in the website rankings.
    (Sorry, couldn’t resist.)

  42. Deny your right foot in,
    Deny your right foot out.
    Do the hokey pokey; all fossils in a rout.
    Deny your left foot in,
    Deny your left foot out.
    And that’s all it’s all whatabout.
    =================

  43. MODS: In the story, the last paragraph before the dashed line and Anthony’s comment should be inside quotation marks.
    REPLY: no, that’s exactly as written on Gore’s website -A

  44. Far be it for me to dispute something with the inventor of the internet and world class climate parasite. I think Gore is going to be rather sad that everything he has ever posted on the internet will effectively live forever. He will have a great deal of trouble recasting the lies, aspersions, misleading hype and mendacity that is the hallmark of his life’s work as anything other than what it is.

  45. Well, I took Anthony’s Alexa Rating graph forwards, viz:

    WUWT is the top of the heap, twice as good as the one in second place. (Sc) means a sceptical site, (Mid) is middle of the road, and (AGW) is AGW supporters. And Al? Well, at least he beat Tamino …

  46. Dear Al
    When I read things like this I understand why you got a C and a D in the two kiddy science courses you did take. Grade inflation.
    Sorry Al the Climategate emails show lousy scientific method and very doubtful integrity. The relesased computer code shows that the CRU was doing mighty low quality work and that their “historic climate record” was fudged. In other words “not science”. Most of the “warming” is doubtful which means the wildly overstated models don’t even fit the past anymore.

  47. Re: Jim @ 5:14 “Where is Algore?” according to the Gore effect he must be in Vermont Or upstate New York We are expecting 18″ of snow tonight and tomorrow.

  48. Al, Al, Al…
    You poor fool.
    And then I read the Der Spiegel article and the German politicians were saying the world would be unlivable if the temperature rose 2 degrees.
    What earnest fools these politicians be.

  49. Hmmm – if you turn the Alexa graph a bit less than 90º anticlockwise it kind of resembles a hockey stick. Coincidence?

  50. Today my intrepid cat, Killowatt, almost got Fat Albert, the gluttonous dove, who hangs out under the birdfeeder hogging all the spilled seed. Killowatt got a claw in him [or her?] and ripped out a few feathers. One day soon Killowat will gut Fat Albert. I hope I’m watching!

  51. rbateman says:
    April 27, 2010 at 5:47 pm
    Al gore gets 100,000 hits a day? Nope, I read it again.
    I checked Alexa, and that’s Al Gore.com’s ranking.
    So Al Baby gets 189,000 rank, and WattsUpWith That ranks 15,500 or
    a full dozen times better than Al.

    Clearly Alexa ranking is not a direct measure of the quality of a site – HuffingtonPost.com is ranked 161, metoffice.gov.uk is ranked 4,287, and TreeHugger.com is ranked 2,679.
    Watts Up With That? is more fun.
    Although I haven’t looked at Alexa.com for a few years – it’s interesting to see which sites are popular these days…

  52. WUWT is not in the top 100 yet. “……and miles to go before I rest….and miles to go before I rest…”
    😉

  53. Speak of ‘Al baby’, did anyone see Glenn Beck last night?
    Follow the money to another stock market bubble!

  54. It is surprising that a fun site like WUWT would beat out Tamino, with all of his interesting statistics discussion. Romm gets an audience by raving like a street corner prophet of doom.

  55. Lee Kington says:
    April 27, 2010 at 8:21 pm

    Hey Al…. do us a favor. Go to the UK and leave America alone. We will do just fine without you.

    The UK is cold enough without the Gore Effect! How about the Sahara? Or Mexico. Actually, I hear is is going to Mexico – watch out for blizzards!

  56. Sad to see Icecap getting less traffic than the criminAL.
    It’s actually a very good site, though often quite technical and difficult for the layman.
    C’mon, people. Give Icecap some love.

  57. Lee Kington says:
    April 27, 2010 at 8:21 pm
    Hey Al…. do us a favor. Go to the UK and leave America alone. We will do just fine without you.

    Oh no you don’t, that’s way to close for comfort.

  58. “What is a ‘climate denier’? I don’t know of anyone who denies that there is a climate.”
    Yeah, but they deny that it’s always changing. Oh wait, they don’t do that either. In fact, they are the first to acknowledge it. So it makes you wonder who the real climate “deniers” are. To believe the AGW crowd, the climate was in a steady state before man came along. How absurd is that.
    Anybody who could seriously use the term “climate denier” shows just how un-serious they are. We are skeptical of the idea of AGW, that’s what we are. They are trying to make an equivalence between AGW and climate (one is the other) and we need to call them on it, and dispute that equivalence, at every opportunity (as Jeff has).

  59. Lindsey Graham, who must never have even taken a science class, is impressed. These idiots give the South a bad rep.

  60. Congratulations, Anthony, to a nice gold medal, and congratulations to Al Gore that he was allowed to spread his message to 1,000 times bigger an audience than otherwise. 😉

  61. I just went to al’s website to give him some friendly advice to sell all his green stocks but it seems there is nowhere to leave a message. How do we communicate with the great communicator?

  62. Robert says:
    April 27, 2010 at 9:27 pm

    Oh no you don’t, that’s way to close for comfort.

    LOL….. actually it is a bit like stomping on my own feet. As a first generation American I have strong ties to the UK inclusive of operating two websites (one blog, one forum) related to Rutland. The smallest county in the UK. The sites are really Brit sites even though I host them on a server in the states.
    The forum does however afford me a good deal of interface with local residents. The numbers who support Gore, at least of those participating, is dwindling. It seems winters have been somewhat unkind to the area in recent years. But then… the MET would know more about that….. uh…….. or would they?
    I also note the IPCC has stepped in it again regarding sea levels and truth. This in regards to Bangladesh,,,,, LINK

  63. Willis Eschenbach, Why not try to put some sort to the x-axis in that graph instead of just numbers? That might avoid the confusion at once.

  64. Lee Kington says:
    April 27, 2010 at 8:21 pm
    “Hey Al…. do us a favor. Go to the UK and leave America alone. We will do just fine without you.”
    ‘Oi! What makes you think we want him, overpaid, overfed and over here?

  65. Lee Kington says:
    April 27, 2010 at 8:21 pm
    Hey Al…. do us a favor. Go to the UK and leave America alone. We will do just fine without you.
    UK? Phht.
    I’m sure Al’s been saving up his carbon credits for the Virgin Intergalactic Taxi or a seat on the Rapture Express.

  66. Under wayne says: April 27, 2010 at 7:40 pm The link failed and ruined the punch.
    Here’s another attempt using the new format:

    OR
    Noah’s Ark Found!
    One or both of these should work.
    (This is science from Al links to on his site)

  67. Lee Kington says:
    April 27, 2010 at 8:21 pm
    I find these statistics interesting….
    http://i247.photobucket.com/albums/gg136/BigLee57/GoreCom1.jpg

    What is even funnier is that you need to read that chart kinda upside down, Al ranks the highest in Norway where only 17742 blogs beat his traffic. Al Gore rates TERRIBLE in UK, there, 416,067 blogs beat his traffic in the UK. These are rankings, not the amount of visits to the blog. Now I imagine in Norway there are only 17743 blogs, so Al came in dead last there too!

  68. #
    Lee Kington says:
    April 27, 2010 at 8:21 pm
    Hey Al…. do us a favor. Go to the UK and leave America alone. We will do just fine without you.
    No way, you keep him – we already have enough sleazy politicians, peddling bad science, which they don’t or won’t understand, in the interests of personal gain or raising taxes.

  69. RWS says:
    April 27, 2010 at 8:29 pm
    Al, Al, Al…
    You poor fool.
    And then I read the Der Spiegel article and the German politicians were saying the world would be unlivable if the temperature rose 2 degrees.
    What earnest fools these politicians be.”
    I don’t know where you live, but here in Phila. PA it’s freezing. Two degree rise is going to ruin the planet???? Heck, I can’t wait for a 30 degree rise around here so I can stop burning oil to be warm.

  70. Bulldust says:
    April 27, 2010 at 5:48 pm
    Denialists in denial… isn’t that, like, a double negative dude?

    Looks more like a redundancy dude.

  71. ” what? Does a MIT PhD top a Penn St.(did I get that right?) PhD? Where does a satellite temp tracker PhD fit? And does a resigned…”
    sadly, dear Mr. Mann got his PhD at Yale. He just works at Penn State

  72. @ Innocentious April 27, 2010 at 5:35 pm

    Heck at the very least would not a warmer planet not make it a little easier to generate power from water as the base temperature of water will be raised a little? Ever closer to changing to its gaseous state?

    Not really. Work is extracted through differential temperature. Both the hot and cold sides rise in temperature by an equal amount so it’s a wash.
    That said, air conditioners are generally more efficient than heaters as the former typically employ heat pumps and the latter electric or combustable fuel powered heating elements so you might get some cost savings there. Hot water heaters will have less work to do but refrigerators will have more. There may be a net benefit in fuel consumption but I don’t think it will be any great amount. The big benefit of CO2 and any warming it can provide is to agriculture and it’s a truly huge benefit there. If CO2 suddenly reverted back to pre-industrial level and global average temperature dropped near typical decadal lows from recent centuries a billion people would probably starve and the rest of us would be eating less and/or paying more.

  73. @willis
    Teh beauty of your charts with those colorful and relevant background photos you choose is unsurpassed. The sun shining on the blog rank data in this article was a hoot.
    I just had to say it once. I think it every time I see one.

  74. Well I deny that I’m a denialist in denial. Rather I’m a sceptic who is sceptical that the IPCC cargo cult science has any real understanding about long-term weather (climate) oscillations in the past and the predictive power of their GCMs about the future is risible.
    Please keep up work, Anthony, and congratulations on your high Alexa ranking!

  75. Why do those of us who do not accept the AGW theory as fact accept the label of “Sceptic”? Applying simple physics theories to climate and considering simple facts about the makeup of the atmosphere along with a bit of chemistry is surely enough to blow the AGW theory out of the water. I much prefer to be known as a climate realist.

  76. Rowland Pantling (UK) says:
    “Why do those of us who do not accept the AGW theory as fact accept the label of ‘Sceptic’?”
    Because it is an honorable term. The scientific method requires scientists to be skeptical of all new hypotheses.
    If that were not so, we would still be going to witch doctors to treat illnesses.
    Climate alarmists hate and fear scientific skeptics because skeptics question the repeatedly falsified theory hypothesis that a tiny trace gas drives climate change.
    Karl Popper and Richard Feynman make elegant arguments in favor of scientific skepticism, without which science cannot progress.
    Be proud of being a scientific skeptic. It makes us infinitely more rational than those who believe in climate witch doctors.

  77. “Lee Kington says:
    April 27, 2010 at 8:21 pm
    Hey Al…. do us a favor. Go to the UK and leave America alone. We will do just fine without you.”
    No Ta mate, deal with your own problems……:-)

  78. I’m not surprised that Al’s site doesn’t have as much traffic. Do you really think there would ever be anything new or different on it?

  79. I’m sorry i’m not a big follower of American politics but was this guy ever going to be President?
    It’s worse in the UK though as all the parties have fallen for this hook, line and sinker.

  80. Al Gore: “Much of the media has done a particularly bad job covering the climate crisis.”
    So, in Gore-land the MSM, who have been trumpeting manmade climate doom for years have failed in their “job” of sufficiently frightening people about a non-problem. Funny, I thought their job was to inform, not to propagandize. But anyway, he recognizes that people aren’t buying the prophecies of climate doom, and blames the media. That’s hilarious. In a way, he’s right, except he thinks it’s because they under-sold it, when in fact it’s the opposite. Between his sci-fi flick, and the MSM’s incessant hype, they actually caused more and more people to start questioning things. They ‘jumped the shark’. Then of course the climate refused to cooperate, there was the hockey schtick, Climategate, all manner of IPCC “Gates”, and the pesky internet exposing it all to public. Horrors. Democracy can be so inconvenient sometimes, can’t it Al?
    “Instead of informing the public about the facts, they have treated the issue as if the same political divisions they exuberantly cover also exist in the scientific community. They don’t.”
    By “informing the public about the facts” Al of course means increasing the hype and alarmism he is so fond of peddling, which is so good for his ego and ultimately his bank account. The “political divisions” thing he mentions appears to be a red herring. It’s a roundabout way of saying “there is an overwhelming scientific consensus”, and “the debate is over”. Wishful thinking on his part.
    Al will never debate on climate. He’s at least smart enough to know that he’d lose, and badly. He’s nothing more than a modern-day version of a slick, snake-oil salesman.

  81. Al Gore et Al.:
    Hastur
    Ithaqua
    Nyarlathotep
    Zhar and Lloigor Azathoth(?)
    Cyäegha
    Nyogtha
    Shub-Niggurath
    Tsathoggua Yog-Sothoth
    Aphoom-Zhah
    Cthugha Cthulhu
    Dagon
    Ghatanothoa
    Mother Hydra
    Zoth-Ommog
    All sharing Kool-Aid addiction.

  82. @stevengoddard:
    That Fox News article you linked to was written by the Associated Press. Fox News printed it, but did not author it.

  83. Fat Albert enjoys popularity with only two groups, the ‘Hollywood’ (aka Commie) Mob and the ever-opportunist Anarchy Mob. He was, is, and always will be a cheap spineless politician who can be led around by the nose by anyone with a pocket full of money. If anything, he is the best example of what is wrong with this country (and a number of others) today and shows the true harm that is caused by the lack of an independent media and the presence of a ‘professional’ political class who only answer to the highest bidders and not the people who elected them.
    There really ought to be a Three Strikes Rule to keep the professional politicians out of office during elections:
    Strike One – They belong to a Major Political Party.
    Strike Two – They’re elected members of the current Congress or Parlement.
    Strike Three – They were elected members of the last Congress or Parlement.
    PS: There are so many suggestions out there about cleaning up the Planet that I thought this deserved “Equal” treatment and consideration. It wouldn’t hurt;-)

  84. I like the icecap web-site also. My local library is doing its best to stop the popularity of the wuwt web-site ,it has been labelled a profane web-site so that I cannot access it on their computers. I have tried to explain to the library the content of wuwt to no avail.
    [Reply: Escalate your concern to your city councilman or equivalent. They want your vote.]

  85. Is it all this correct? (Source:Wikipedia)
    Biography
    American politician, an attractive member for the Democratic Party with a famous political name, a solid family life, and strong religious conviction. He is the only son of a powerful U.S. Senator from Tennessee, Albert Gore, Sr. and Pauline LaFon Gore, a graduate of Vanderbilt Law School who campaigned as a helpmate with her husband. Al grew up with political and social awareness and great admiration for his parents. He received a degree in government with honors from Harvard University in 1969. After graduation, he enlisted in the U.S. Army.

  86. The decline of two faced PMs
    After Gordon Brown made a very personal attack against “flat earth” “global warming deniers” simply for pointing out the lack of science in climate “science”I think the following conversation overheard by a mic left on will be amusing.
    In Public saying goodbye to Grandmother he has spoken to
    Very good to meet you, very good to meet you
    and you’re wearing the right colour (red) today, ha ha ha
    Good to see you all, good to see you
    thanks very much
    (big wave — broad smile to the lady and waiting press)
    After the car door shuts
    that was a disaster
    aid:what did she say
    well …
    should never have put me with that woman
    who’s idea was that?
    Aid: no idea didn’t …
    It was sue I think.
    it’s just ridiculous!
    aid: they’re … pictures …. I’m not sure they will go with that one
    they will go with that!
    aid: what did she say
    oh, everything she’s just the sort of bigoted woman that says she used to be labour, it’s just ridiculous.

  87. I’m glad to see WUWT’s Alexa ranking has been noticed by others.
    A few weeks ago when you had a guest post by an AGWer (a Dr. Meyer?) that was cordially received and for the most part displayed very gracious comments by everyone, even when there was severe disagreement, I was motivated to point out the marked difference to the RealClimate regulars.
    I didn’t expect the true believers to be changed but was hoping to point out the difference in tone to visitors to that site who believed what they were told. Some commenters tried to marginalize WUWT so I responded with a comment showing that your Alexa ranking was over 4 times as high as RealClimate. Want to guess which comment didn’t get past the moderators??? I guess it was an “Inconvenient Truth” they didn’t want others to see. 🙂
    Thanks and great job Anthony!
    Steve

  88. MartinGAtkins says: The link you gave with an image has been deleted by the Holy Inquisition.

  89. ♫♫♫ Roly Poly, eating corn and taters
    Hungry every minute of the day
    Roly Poly, gnawing on a biscuit
    Long as he can chew it it’s okay
    He can eat an apple pie
    Never even bat an eye
    He likes everything from a soup to hay
    Roly Poly, daddy’s little fatty
    Fatty’s gonna be nobel prize winner someday
    Roly Poly, scrambled eggs for breakfast
    Bread and jelly twenty times a day
    Roly Poly eats a hardy dinner
    He needs lots of strength to sing and play
    He’s up at dawn and does the chores
    He runs both ways to all the stores
    He works up an appetite that-a-way
    Oh, Roly Poly, daddy’s little fatty
    Fatty’s gonna be a nobel prize winner someday
    ♫♫♫

  90. How close was Al Gore to being President of the United States?
    The more I think about that possibility the scarier it gets!
    We don’t want Gore in the UK thanks. Despite his Green UK cohorts raising his Daily Traffic Rank Trend above its real position.

  91. JS says:
    April 27, 2010 at 9:25 pm
    Sad to see Icecap getting less traffic than the criminAL.
    It’s actually a very good site, though often quite technical and difficult for the layman.
    C’mon, people. Give Icecap some love.

    Nah, presentation is too cold. Three columns of small text stacked two deep, plus sidebar, brrrr! That could be done with with six tabs, less scrolling, leaving space for readable text and graphics. Icecap also suffers from “broadband assumption” like Climate Depot does. On dial-up I can play a game or two of Mahjongg waiting for them to load, and often the graphic loading will time out leaving incomplete images necessitating a reload. But with Morano’s site I then have lots of interesting headlines I can quickly browse through which makes it worthwhile.
    Maybe Icecap should ask Mr. Watts for some layout suggestions. Sure couldn’t hurt! 🙂

  92. Questions:
    1) Does Al Gore tell lies?
    2) Does he profit from these lies?
    3) Can the lies be proven to be lies?
    If the answers are yes, yes, and yes then surely there is a crime here be it deception or fraud. The only way to bring Gore down is before a jury.

  93. Dave Springer says:
    April 28, 2010 at 2:48 am

    @willis
    The beauty of your charts with those colorful and relevant background photos you choose is unsurpassed. The sun shining on the blog rank data in this article was a hoot.
    I just had to say it once. I think it every time I see one.

    Thanks, Dave, I wanted to “shine a light” on how powerful WUWT is in relationship, not just to Poor Al, but all of the climate science blogs.
    I am in a minority, I know, but I think that scientific papers should be a) readable, b) understandable, and c) lovely.
    a) and b) are particularly important in climate science, because of the breadth of disciplines involved. Everyone from A (atmospheric chemists) to Z (zoologists) has a contribution to make to climate science, so they all need to understand what is written. In addition, on sites such as this one, the “citizen scientists” and interested lurkers from a host of professions form a large part of the readership. So clarity of exposition is crucial.
    But “c)”, the graphs like the one above? Ah, they are my joy … it was a red-letter day when I realized I could put a photo in the background of an Excel chart, make the lines partly transparent, and end up with a powerful visual tool.
    And now, with Anthony’s lovely new site theme, I have the wider canvas which I have wished for, no more need for dwarf graphs. What’s not to like?
    My best to all,
    w.

  94. I would not buy those figures because a lot of those who think AGW is sound science read this blog, while few deniers read Climate Progress and Real Climate.

  95. Amino Acids in Meteorites says:
    April 28, 2010 at 7:43 am

    Tamin-who?

    Don’t know if this is a woosh or not, but if not, someone who hides behind the name “Tamino” runs a site laughably called “Open Mind”. He appears to be an excellent mathematician, but his mind is closed to anything but the party line. I’ve been banned from there for asking inconvenient scientific questions … which is a clear dividing line for me between science and propaganda. RealClimate does the same, as I have detailed in a peer reviewed paper here. You’d think they’d notice that Alexa site rank (how many people your message reaches) is related to whether they censor scientific questions and contributions at their site, but I’m glad they haven’t noticed … truth is, people like to hear both sides of a debate and make up their own minds.

  96. He is lined up to make billions if the world goes along with trying to prevent global warming by doing cap and trade or carbon trading of any kind. Why don’t more people notice the conflict of interest?

  97. It would be interesting to use the same sites to rank who is getting the most new visitors. Or can’t this be done?
    Love the new look site Anthony. That thin line depicting our atmosphere is a reality check.
    REPLY: glad you noticed that, it was one of the reasons I chose the image. Wait till you see the other images coming in the banner. -A

  98. RobertT687 says:
    April 28, 2010 at 10:14 am
    I have no problem being called skeptical as to be otherwise is to be gullible.

    I like that… Climate Skeptics vs. Gore-ist Gullibles.

  99. Re: Willis Eschenbach
    Hi Willis.
    That is a very interesting paper you wrote on the problems of scientific papers subverting scrutiny. Where was it published?
    Kind Regards
    Michael

  100. Al Gore should go back to banning KISS albums. He actually had more credibility then. And i like to think I share a small part of the credit (or blame) for traffic here since I posted my source as “WUWT” to u-tube so many times. I (they) have received a free education here. Many thanks Mr. Watts. I look fwd to the day when the articles are just interesting again instead of vitally important in stopping “the scientific elite” President Eisenhower warned us about. As for AlGore, is it okay Mr Gore if I have a fire in my fireplace to warm myself by today? And for God’s sake stop scaring the children you big creep!

  101. kadaka (KD Knoebel) says:
    April 28, 2010 at 10:24 am
    Re Icecap you said:
    “Nah, presentation is too cold. Three columns of small text stacked two deep, plus sidebar, burr! ”
    You’ve hit the nail on the head. Icecap is just too difficult to read. It has excellent content posted in a timely fashion, but it challenges my transition lenses. I used to go there daily, but have cut my visits to once-in-a-while. They could easily leap forward in the rankings with a reader friendly redesign!

  102. ditto on Icecap. It is bookmarked but I can’t read it. Text too small for 50+ year old green eyes.

  103. There was once a man who shorted a companies stock. Then flew around the world telling everybody who would listen to sell the companies stock because the sky was falling!

  104. If Eschenbach’s hawk flies with the new format all the birds on my feeder happily join him as long as he promises not to eat them. Except for Fat Albert, of course.

  105. Re: Willis Eschenbach

    Hi Willis.
    That is a very interesting paper you wrote on the problems of scientific papers subverting scrutiny. Where was it published?
    Kind Regards
    Michael

    Michael, the paper was published in the peer-reviewed journal that the AGW crowd loves to hate, Energy and Environment. With the irrepressible Sonja Boehmer-Christiansen as the Editor, it is a constant thorn in their sides.
    w.

  106. stan stendera says:
    April 28, 2010 at 5:59 pm

    If Eschenbach’s hawk flies with the new format all the birds on my feeder happily join him as long as he promises not to eat them. Except for Fat Albert, of course.

    Dang, that’s got to be a rare bird. I never heard of it, and Google can’t find it either … you have a reference somewhere?
    w.

  107. Jabba the Gore couldn’t argue facts with teens in Regina Saskatchewan when his tour ran into questions he was very uncomfortable addressing thereby dropping the Q&A altogether. Now he thinks to argue facts with Lindzen? He won’t enter a building with Moncton in chains in the basement yet he’d debate the issue with Lindzen? The panic stricken warmists have only ever had to reproduce replicable results to win the argument and I’m certain Jabba the Gore as their spokesperson gives them one and all nightmares. The man is a buffoon.

  108. http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2010/04/al_gores_growing_carbon_footpr.html
    Al Gore’s growing carbon footprint
    Thomas Lifson
    The environmental impact of Al Gore is growing faster than his waistline. The warmist con game has been very lucrative for the king of carbon credits. He and Tipper have just added to their collection of energy-gobbling homes with a nearly 9 million dollar 5 bedroom, 9 bath Italian-style villa in the celebrity-studded coastal enclave of Montecito, California, home to Oprah Winfry and many other celebrities. Al certainly likes living large. The home comes complete with 6 fireplaces. How are Al and Tip going to use them without generating carbon dioxide?
    Way to go Al!

Comments are closed.