Readers may recall yesterday when I wrote about the event sponsored by Chico State University that I was “disinvited” from because I was not allowed to use visuals that I wanted to explain the science.
Well, good news, even though I won’t be allowed to speak there, the world gets to watch it live via webcast.
At left is a snapshot from the student debate in progress now, but the Main Event that I was supposed to speak at comes later, at 6:30PM Pacific Time. I encourage WUWT readers to watch.
If nothing else, WUWT readers can demonstrate their collective global impact on the number of viewers of this event. Given that the city council streaming video webserver generally handles just a few dozen to a few hundred viewers, depending on the topic, we have a very good chance of setting an all time viewership record.
Here’s the details on the agenda and the link to live video.
Chico Municipal Center, Council Chamber, 421 Main Street
|
1.
|
THE CHICO GREAT DEBATE – OCTOBER 28, 2010 The Great Debate is a cooperative project between the City of Chico and California State University, Chico, to create a public space for civil discourse. This semester’s topic is: “AB 32: To Suspend or Not to Suspend” – The Global Warming Solutions Act
|
|
2.
|
Listing of the proposed events: You can also view these sessions on Cable Channel 11.
|
|
3.
|
ADJOURNMENT
|
To watch it live click this link:
http://chico-ca.granicus.com/ViewPublisher.php?view_id=2
…and then click on “view event” right at the top.
UPDATE: Some people are concerned that WUWT viewers may crash the server, and I’ll get blamed. I don’ t think it is likely to happen. The company that runs the server for them handles much much larger cities and towns also, and they host it. So I think they can handle thousands of simultaneous connections. I actually put in the first streaming server for the city council chambers, and they replaced mine (donated) with this, and it is pretty well done.
If I thought there was any chance of crashing that streaming server I would not bother to suggest it. We may however set a viewer record for them. – Anthony
This should be interesting. I’m sitting here looking at snow levels of 4,000′ in October, and it’s piling up on the mountains.
What Global Warming? Not here, and certainly not anywhere in this sector of the globe.
If we don’t blow up their server, maybe we will see somebody use slides 😉 or big cartons with graphs on them.
I’m, in for the presentations and wished I’d seen the earlier presentations.
Here are my views on Prop 23:
This isn’t about Oil vs Clean Energy, its about a poorly crafted piece of legislation that will do more harm than good and about protecting jobs until AB32 is fixed and we can afford it.
Very few voters have taken the time to read AB32 (the Global Warming Act of 2006) and to understand it was enacted before the facts were known about flawed climate science. AB32 is Not a pollution control Bill, its a passe Global Warming Bill and no one even uses the term Global Warming any more.
AB32 simply needs to strip out the Cap and Trade provision and reliance on Global Warming assumptions and its potentially a piece of leadership legislation. Sustainability, Clean Energy, and Stewardship are great goals but not at the expense of Common Sense.
AB32 needs to eliminate the Cap and Trade provisions 70% of America Opposes, eliminate the unnecessary oversight Fees, eliminate the reliance on flawed Green House Gas assumptions, correct the vague language that will introduce Environmental Red Tape that will do more damage than good, ensure AB32 doesn’t undermine The Rule of Law, and make non-governmental agencies like CARB accountable to the taxpayer for their mistakes.
If the Rule of Law is allowed to become Rule by Bureaucrats using loosely defined AB32 legislation, we are all doomed.
Vote YES on Prop 23, it makes the most sense until AB32 is fixed and we can afford it.
2:40pm PT:
Very nervous presenter stating inaccurate and unsubstantiated claims.
Hey, I can see a flat screen television display switched on there – not showing anything but blue right now, but still … !
California emits 1.4% of the world’s greenhouse gasses? Nice rebuttal.
I thought this was supposed to be a “classic debate” in the Lincoln/Douglas style. What’s with the microphone, TV cameras, and global audience?
And people I’ve never heard of?
From the wide shot of all those empty seats its seems to be a mass debate.
OT:
The French Academy of Sciences has issued a report about their short debate; The IPCC conclusions are largely standing and “rogue” academy members are condemned by the media.
Nature echoes this Pyrrhic victory of official science:
http://blogs.nature.com/news/thegreatbeyond/2010/10/french_climate_farce.html
Farce indeed!
It’s funny. It reminds me of high school when we did projects and ate up what the teachers would sell us. We didn’t know any better and they would prop us up in front of people to regurgitate what we’ve been told with references and quotes supporting those ideas. They are clearly nervous. Why is there no one there though?
pretty underwhelming student presentations – not very robust ‘debating’! and can someone deal with the white balance? I looks like they’re having the meeting in a freezer!
I see the Panels on Agricultural Industry and Environmentalists are using ‘slides’ …
I don’t think this is a good idea. If we crash their server people will say that Anthony knew this would happen and it was his form of revenge, and he will look petty because of it.
REPLY: I don’ t think it is likely to happen. The company that runs the server for them handles much much larger cities and towns also, and they host it. So I think they can handle thousands of simultaneous connections. I actually put in the first streaming server for the city council chambers, and they replaced mine (donated) with this, and it is pretty well done.
If I thought there was any chance of crashing that streaming server I would not bother to suggest it. We may however set a viewer record for them. – Anthony
After November 2, who cares?
would it be unsporting to let them know their mic’s are still live?
How can they cover much of anything with only 1 hr for the Prop 23 debate? Looks like some sort of dog and pony show.
oops — “as you can see in this graph” she’s saying…
And now they’re showing a Powerpoint presentation! Hypocrites.
I see graphics with tree blossom and a very small crowd.
Came in at 23:30hrs (BST), at the start of the Agricultural Industry presentation, the first comment which caught my ear was “I don’t know what that is” when the girl mentioned ‘cling-pip? nut?’ She used a slide (!!) to emphasise her initial comments. The relayed computer screen was visible in the shot I saw.
The second speaker read out her pre-prepared, read-from-the-script delivery in a robotic manner.
The third speaker made this same fact clear fin her first sentence.
I refuse to listen further. The is a completely warped set of what some would call ‘presentations’. The very delivery of the garbage being spouted is so very amateurish that it has to be pre-prepared to be given by unthinking stupes.
No FARMERS appear to be nominated to speak. On agriculture!
OMG!! The next speaker, a male, could not even read his script correctly, after claiming that it was his!
This drivel is so bad that I simply cannot continue.
Ended listening, in complete disgust, at 23:50.
that’s inaccurate:
21 instances of 4 consecutive quarters with unemployment at or below 5.5% have occurred since 1987. 7 instances in each of three 2.5 year periods. 23 years not 30 years per the student statement.
Wouldn’t be nice, after spending $24mil to counter “Big Texas Oil’s” $8mil, and they still lose?
I can dream…
Brilliant! As Max Boyce said (Welsh readers only) I was there.
Lat time I checked the UCS didn’t have any scientists on their board. Have things changed?
I see these young people speaking and I keep seeing the image of all those kool-aid drinkers lined up in neat rows in Guyana. This is definitely a religion and these kids are in the thrall of their charismatic professors/leaders. I have thought of them as kool-aid drinkers. But, I’m starting to think the plan is to force us to take the kool-aid.
Sorry Anthony, the California Jobs Initiative(Prop 23) should fail. The United States needs examples of Green Economics so that every state and America as a whole can learn from California’s mistakes.
You are going to have to take one for the team.
REPLY: Well in Sweden you don’t have to live with the consequences, so it is easy for you to say. As a business owner here, it will be the death of me and many others. – Anthony
Somebody in the audience asked a question on a certain “slide”. SO, clearly, the room is set for visual presentations. They lied to you Anthony.
Overall, the presentations were very low grade. High-school kids could do better. Most of them were reading cards.
If I had to grade them… F-
REPLY: No this is the prelim stuff, the main debate at 6:30 was to be without slides – Anthony
Anthony, you need to move to a place far far far away from Chico…..
VY 73 pRadio
Thanks for the heads-up Anthony,
I tune back in at 6:30.
Hopefully the Senior Debate team and Community Members will have a better grasp of the issues.
Paul in Sweden says:
October 28, 2010 at 4:22 pm
“Sorry Anthony, the California Jobs Initiative(Prop 23) should fail. The United States needs examples of Green Economics so that every state and America as a whole can learn from California’s mistakes.”
I thought the UK already volunteered. (Germany doesn’t count; we have enough real industry to subsidize the green jobs; at least for now.)
What, they want to suspend Prop 19?????!!! Gasp!! Oh wait, it’s 23, thank God! Don’t scare me like that!
This had better be worth it LOL!
It’ll be 02:30 here in the UK. Filling in time washing clothes.
Server’s not great 233kbps. Got a download from either Oxford or Cambridge at 3 times that rate.
DaveE.
DirkH says:
October 28, 2010 at 4:49 pm
OUCH,; yes we did, but only after watching Spain & Greece destroy themselves. They never asked me either. 🙁
DaveE.
Yuck! Silverlight! Can’t you persuade them to use a free and open standard? Public discourse shouldn’t be in proprietary formats. It is a matter of principle.
Anthony, re your disinvitation. As I read it, they uninvited you based upon their unwillingness to cater to a disability.
As I understand the law, this is almost certainly a serious criminal offense. You may want to ask a lawyer to take a look at it. Also ask a civil lawyer to take a look and see what sort of damages he thinks you might be owed.
Anthony, it’s quite disingenuous to claim you were “disinvited.” When the conditions weren’t to your liking you replied in your email:
“Given the disadvantages I will face, and unless there is some sort of accommodation for me to present at least some visuals, I see no other option but to decline your invitation.”
I call BS on the “disinvited” meme.
REPLY: Think whatever you like, be as upset as you wish, but you are reading it wrong. The facts are: They invited me, and made no statement of presentation conditions or restrictions in the invitation or supporting documents they sent, then when I asked about slides, they didn’t say “no” right away, they had a meeting, then they said no. The conditions of the invitation changed post facto. That’s disingenuous. What they should have done is admitted they made no restrictions and then accommodated me, especially since I offered to make it a level playing field for everyone. The room is setup for slide shows, to be broadcast on both cable TV and webcast, and all it would have required was a simple “yes” and I would have handled the rest. Yet they couldn’t bring themselves to do it. Yet today, we see other sessions using slides in the same room, so it’s certainly easy enough for them to do.
Watch it live here. http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/10/28/watch-the-great-debate-on-californias-prop-23/
– Anthony
Thanks supermod! 🙂
DaveE.
I wonder how prop 23 would do if people were aware of the push by Schwarzenegger and ARB to get tied into an international REDD scheme where we’d pay foreign countries money each year to store our excess carbon?
Connect the dots:
1)
“Underlying motivation of AB 32 is to create a national, international market”
Page 7 of the following link:
http://www.carbonoffsetproviders.org/resources/5+-+AB+32$2C+Carbon+Markets$2C+and+Carbon+Policy+$28J+Nation$29.pdf
2)
“The COPC is pleased to have this opportunity to comment on the presentation made by the California Air Resources Board (“ARB”) at its July 30, 2010 stakeholder workshop on Sector-Based Crediting & Subnational Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Degradation (“REDD”) as part of a California Cap-and-Trade Program.1”
“California’s role should be limited to ensuring that the offsets generated by the REDD projects meet the AB 32 requirement that they be real, verifiable, enforceable and permanent.”
http://www.carbonoffsetproviders.org/resources/COPC+Comments+on+7.30.10+ARB+Presentation+re+REDD+$288.20.10$29.PDF
“Notice of Public Workshop to Discuss Sector-Based Crediting and Subnational Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Degradation (REDD) as part of a California Cap-and-Trade Program.”
http://www.arb.ca.gov/cc/capandtrade/meetings/073010/notice.pdf
What is REDD?
3)
“The REDD+ legislation–short for “reducing deforestation and forest degradation”–will require industrialized nations to pay developing nations to store carbon in their forests as well as manage them according to sustainable standards. Advocates say REDD+ will greatly benefit developing nations by helping to bring them out of poverty and end forest mismanagement.”
http://www.naturalnews.com/029703_climate_change_legislation.html
“Reducing Emissions from Deforestation and Forest Degradation (REDD) is an effort to create a financial value for the carbon stored in forests, offering incentives for developing countries to reduce emissions from forested lands and invest in low-carbon paths to sustainable development. “”
http://www.un-redd.org/AboutREDD/tabid/582/language/en-US/Default.aspx”
In summary, the governator and the traitors in ARB are working to reduce our standard of living by raising the cost of oil (and the over 400 mostly everday items made with it) and then transferring part of the higher energy costs revenues to foreign nations as both welfare and funding for sustainable development. And you can bet dollars to doughnuts that the sustainable development programs will be green energy and general infrastructure (roads, ports, water, etc) that when done, will be attractive places for businesses in the US to relocate jobs to.
Kramer
Obviously I wasn’t at the deliberation that took place subsequent to your request to use slides but I speculate that it was along the lines of:
Party 1 (after receiving Watts’ first email request to use slides, realizing that that’s outside of the chosen format, and setting up a meeting with one or more others on the selection committee): One of the “pro” invitees wants to use slides.
Party 2: Well, that’s not the format we’d chosen, did you specify in the invitation that this was to be oral arguments only?
Party 1: No, and I’d really like to have this guy – he’s got a hugely popular blog, he’s well known. Video is his chosen medium, he believes he can present his case much more lucidly with slides, and would be at a disadvantage without them.
Party 2: I can understand that but we’d then be changing the rules for five other people who, perhaps, aren’t as well-versed and well-prepared for a PowerPoint presentation. I’m sorry, but we’ll need to leave the format the way it is. Hopefully, he can participate anyway.
Party 1: OK, I’ll let him know.
Now, it’s not as if Watts is a stealth representative of the status quo side. If they didn’t want him there, he wouldn’t have been invited in the first place. I realize it fits the prevailing paradigm here to claim that “once they realized how powerful Watts would be with slides and who he was, they needed an excuse to not allow him to participate” but it just ain’t so.
I’m not the slightest bit upset, why should I be emotionally invested in this? I just call BS when I see it.
REPLY: And it still doesn’t change the fact that they changed the rules post facto. If you make an invitation, and you make no specifications, then change it later, that’s not my failure, but theirs. – Anthony
Even if, for the sake of argument only, I concede your point (I don’t actually), the implication in your original post (and certainly that of your flock) is that the “negative” side of the debate wouldn’t be able to withstand the overwhelming force of your presentation were you to use slides.
This is puffery of the highest order. As I said in my previous comment, if they didn’t want you they wouldn’t have invited you. Do you (or your readers) really think they panicked that the audience would be blown away by an intellectual tour de force if you were allowed to use slides?
And, to reiterate, my BS call remains.
The art of disinformation
REPLY: And remain it shall, though worth nothing, since you don’t haven’t the courage to put your name to your challenge. – Anthony
>> REPLY: Well in Sweden you don’t have to live with the consequences, so it is easy for you to say. As a business owner here, it will be the death of me and many others. – Anthony <<
Can you move your business to another state? We'd love to have you down here in sunny, business-friendly Florida.
David A. Evans says:
October 28, 2010 at 5:13 pm
DirkH says:
October 28, 2010 at 4:49 pm
OUCH,; yes we did, but only after watching Spain & Greece destroy themselves. They never asked me either. 🙁
DaveE.
Spain has really taken one for the team with 20% unemployment. The UK is trying desperately to martyr itself for the cause…
I guess they’re delaying hoping more people will show up for an audience.
Damn. So far 3 females, full of sound & fury, signifying NOTHING!
DaveE.
[Ah, but regardless of sex, what were their arguments and where was their logic? Robt]
The shorter organisers-
Al Gore has given us all quite enough audio-visuals to date thank you very much Anthony. Well apart from the need to fire up the appropriate watchers/listeners to the debate beforehand of course.
No audio-visuals in an argument about science and economics? Makes you wonder why they chose to televise it rather than insist all interested parties attend in person, not to mention looking forward to the next IPCC report sans graphics. Sheesh!
The green economy and the movement relies on emotional arguments. They admit the facts don’t support it.
They said this was a student debate. Are there any non-students going to speak?
Perhaps some Al Jolson makeup and a change of name to Antoinette might have got under their guard?
I keep wondering if the people supporting AB32 aren’t the smart ones… Run all business out of California, go bankrupt, get a Federal bailout, live off of other’s taxes… I mean, this could work.
In Texas, we like bringing in the businesses California scares off. Keep them coming! 🙂
Tips to debaters:
Memorize your speech. Heads up and speak to the audience. Banish “Um”.
Why are they bothering to show this? I am forcefully reminded of Lisa Simpson presenting her school project. She is only 8 years old. And a better public speaker.
I may be wrong but I don’t think Lincoln just sat behind a desk reading out a series of disconnected notes as fast as possible without drawing breath and failing to make any engagement with the audience. The current (mass) debater even has to run their finger along the notes to keep their place. No light and shade, no attempt at oratory.
Anthony – you did well not to attend. You would have embarrassed the other participants.
7:17pm PST, watching the event with a smooth feed!
Am really sorry that Anthony wasn’t allowed to present. Their loss, and that’s the real tragedy.
1st speaker reads something.
2nd speaker reads something
3rd speaker reads something
4th speaker reads something (and uses her finger to follow the words on the page!)
I just woke up in time to hear how carbon, (not CO2 mind you but carbon) stays in the atmosphere for 500 years. I wonder is that soot, diamond, or charcoal briquettes?
Poor format for students. Weak arguments and no facts from adults. They all believe in Al Gore “science”. I stopped watching as there was no debate with supporting facts. Only thing missing was a teleprompter with someone reading the news. 451 for everyone.
OT
“Gore leaves car idling for one hour during speech; Opts for Swedish government jet over public transportation………….’Local legislation prohibits any car engine running for more than 60 seconds’ — But Gore Not Fined”
http://www.climatedepot.com/a/8595/Gore-leaves-car-idling-for-one-hour-during-speech-Opts-for-Swedish-government-jet-over-public-transportation
Climate Depot
DJ Meredith says:
October 28, 2010 at 7:18 pm
7:17pm PST, watching the event with a smooth feed!
Am really sorry that Anthony wasn’t allowed to present. Their loss, and that’s the real tragedy.
Me too. Maybe somebody was afraid of what he had to show and say…
This was no debate. It was a bunch of people reading papers. What a sham! Pathetic.
When Prop 23 passes join the stampede of businesses coming to Idaho for a better business climate Anthony. We’ll welcome your business and hundreds of others with open arms.
It’s a really bad time to try to guilt the taxpayers into handing more money to the inefficient government bureaucracy.
Don’t believe me?, watch the vote count Tuesday.
“a vote between hope and fear”
LOL this guy is an evangelical idiot. BELIEEEVE BELIEEEEEEEVE
Darn, I only caught the tail end. Anyone record it???
REPLY: the link page will have the video as file you can play back by tomorrow. – Anthony
yeah the world is watching.. when we lay down… WHAM. Sucka!
opposite to “they bring a knife.. we bring a gun”.. to quote a phrase.
endogenous respiration if you ask me.
I apologize on behalf of my community
Where did that guy get his, “It’s the warmest it’s been in history,” from?
Which history?
Whose history?
Until I watched some of the “debate”, if that is what it is supposed to be, I now understand that there are hysterical people out there. Until now they have just been faceless entities on blogs having a bit of a rant. Now that you can see the faces and hear the hysterics, I’m really starting to get worried.
Anthony
Move!
Quickly.
These guys are far more dangerous than any amount of GHGs. Oh dear oh dear…….
I stayed up for that! A law based on AGW should perhaps discus AGW!
DaveE.
Anthony
I don’t think there is any need to apologise. It is not your fault after all.
And if it exposes the follies of others for the world to see then their folly is not yours.
Kindest Regards.
Thanks Anthony, I’ll try and watch it on the weekend then. Too busy tomorrow.
Sorry for the OT, but have you seen this yet?:
http://joannenova.com.au/2010/10/rare-historic-weather-observatory-faces-closure/
I watched the entire ‘debate.’ That was an interesting blend of facts, climate blather, claims of cost savings and CO2 reductions, and people who seemed to be on the verge of a nervous breakdown. It was not a debate, as jorgekafkazar above already said.
Anthony, you live in an interesting city.
Sorry Anthony, drove home from work. What is it you wanted to know about me? Most of what I see is either first names (mine’s Rob) or pseudonyms such as the one I selected. I see very, very few first and last names, I was just trying to stick with the tradition. But for the record, mine last name is Ryan.
And this helps you reply how, exactly?
REPLY: I get attacked by wonks of all stripes daily. I see you’ve written an attack piece on your own blog, unsigned. Step up, put your name to your words if you want them to count for something, otherwise it’s just noise – Anthony
That’s a good idea, hadn’t actually occurred to me. I will do so.
Done. Fair enough?
REPLY: Great, welcome to the light. We’re done then. Unless of course you want to actually watch the debate recording at the link provided and see how it just screamed out for some help.
Yeah the visuals would have just killed it dead. /sarc – Anthony
I probably will watch it when it’s up tomorrow (or, more likely, this weekend what with having a living to earn and all).
But whether or not it would be a compelling event was not the thrust of your post or that of your commenters (for the most part). Rather the sentiment at WUWT was that they were afraid of your ability to sway the faithful were you to have access to visuals.
PA32R says:
Most of what I see is either first names (mine’s Rob) or pseudonyms such as the one I selected. I see very, very few first and last names, I was just trying to stick with the tradition. But for the record, mine last name is Ryan.
Rob, welcome to the light of day. I think if you take an honest look at the skeptic blogs you’ll see that a lot of us, more than on “the others”, use real names. Using your real name demands accountability and gives credibility. Oddly enough, I’ve never been threatened or challenged by warmists but have taken the occasional beating from fellow skeptics. All in public. Many of the semi-anonymous commenters here have revealed enough information about themselves that they could be identified if anyone was really interested…. anonymity encourages incivility… after asking the moderators to remove really inappropriate posts I decided to post under my real name. If I didn’t want my name associated with something, then it was probably best not posted. Even if most of us disagree with you, we will defend your right to say it…. but you have to be able to accept the blow-back…. which should NOT include threats or attempts to get you fired or ………
PA32R says:
October 28, 2010 at 8:39 pm
> Most of what I see is either first names (mine’s Rob) …
Most doesn’t make it right or good. One reason I use my real name (okay, it’s really Eric), is that it reminds me that what I’m writing will forever be associated with me and not some silly past identity like EW13 (part of my account number at CMU’s computers ages ago).
Likewise, I don’t read comments from anonymous posters closely figuring the poster doesn’t feel good enough about his comments to put his name to them.
There are a few people with legitimate reasons to hide their identities, but for the most part if you believe in what you’re writing, why hide behind an anonymous smoke screen?
It would actually be pretty amusing for someone to attempt to get me fired. I wouldn’t give out a home address, a telephone number, etc. I doubt if I’d give the name of my firm, but I’d certainly describe the nature of its business. I have no opinions behind which I’m not willing to stand but I’m not willing to subject others to the line of fire.
Rob Ryan
“Well, good news, even though I won’t be allowed to speak there….”
Give it up, Anthony.
My hero is really beginning to disappoint me now and I’m beginning to question his ability to dispassionately analyze a set of facts. The fact is that you were invited to speak, but without the invitation having spelling out the stipulated conditions to which all participants would be expected to adhere. The fact is that you attempted to set your own conditions. The fact is that the host refused some of those conditions. The fact is that you then declined the invitation. Twist and turn it as you may, those are the facts.
Don’t let the “Chico factor” drive you off into an emotional swamp. Your important work requires a clear head.
REPLY: I appreciate how you might see it that way but no that’s not all the facts, if somebody invites me with no preconditions, to a place setup for multimedia, I don’t expect them to exclude it after the invitation. They added a rule post facto, only after I asked about it. As seen live, they ran multimedia today in the very same room, for the student debate, clearly it wasn’t a problem. The idea that one debating group gets to use multimedia and another group doesn’t while debating the same topic in the same room on the same day is arbitrary and capricious. They could have simply said yes and had a win-win but instead decided to impose new rules they hadn’t considered or published before I asked. If the situation were reversed, those very same people would have a veritable cow.
On the plus side, the whole debate was much ado about nothing, poorly orchestrated, poorly attended, so it was actually a kindness that I didn’t get to attend. – Anthony
Rob Ryan
By PA32R on October 28, 2010 at 9:58 pm
——-
Rob Ryan,
Glad to meet you.
John
Ummm
Over here in UK, we reserve the term ‘City’ for somewhere of at least regional significance. It used to be that it also had to have a Cathedral, not just a big Parish Church. And most of then have 200K+ inhabitants.
But I was once in Johnson City Tx, expecting somewhere of similar import, and spent a dull afternoon watching the single traffic light change 🙁
For calibration, how big is the City of Chico? How many inhabitants?
Gotta’ give you guys high marks for not censoring critical comments like the ones I’ve recently made. I know of no other site that so religiously adheres to a policy of open exchange of opinions and theories. Thank you and keep up the good work!
CH
[REPLY – We strive to allow whatever comments we can. We do have to put a foot down occasionally, but we try to keep it to a minimum. Such is the character of our host. ~ Evan]
@ Latimer Alder
Chico has 88,000 people in the City limits, 100,000 or so if you also count the nearby unincorporated areas.
It looks as though they have removed the video from the site???
I wish global warming was true in sydney it is bloody cold
As I recall, in another thread, somebody challenged Anthony to a debate in Chico, or upbraided him for not being at one, a professor I think, and as Anthony then pointed out, he was at a particular disadvantage because of his hearing, so regular readers here would already know that this was an issue. It has also come up at odd times in other threads.
Strawman. At no point ever, did Anthony say or “imply” that.
This is a public debate with potentially serious consequences, not some university challenge where theatrics and emotive arguments are the order of the day. It should be about the science.
To that end, if they were genuinely interested in informing people, they wouldn’t be tying peoples’ hands behind their backs. Including those on the other side. There’s been far too much heat and not enough light in this whole debate already.
Paul Hanlon
Ric Werme says:
October 28, 2010 at 9:37 pm
PA32R says:
October 28, 2010 at 8:39 pm
“[…]
There are a few people with legitimate reasons to hide their identities, but for the most part if you believe in what you’re writing, why hide behind an anonymous smoke screen?”
Why? Personal experience with nutjobs as a longtime poster on another topic with quasi-religious acolytes.
I mentioned in comments a couple of years ago (before Anthony had volunteer mods) my willingness to accept the fact that I’d be a second-class poster here, as well as my appreciation that still, Anthony allows and welcomes all comments, anonymous or not, so long as they follow policy.
I don’t recall having ever posted a personal attack on another poster from my position of anonymity. That would NOT be cricket. (Making fun of Al Gore is OK, though.)
I’m not so sure that the tradition of using pseudonyms in comments on weblogs is necessarily sinister or trying to hide something. I think it’s more likely modesty. If I were a scientist or someone of some note it would be appropriate to back up my pronouncements with a full name, but, since I’m not, I have no authority to lend to my words and they must stand on their own.
In my own case, my first name is Dave, my surname begins with F and if Mr Watts or the moderators look at my email address they will see not only my surname but also the area of my gainful employment. Not really hiding, but not shouting either. Best wishes, Dave.
Well. Having slept on it I still recall the same debate.
Just a bunch of true believers debating not if AB32 was right, but whether it is right now!
As for whether Anthony was disinvited, no he wasn’t but he was certainly not welcome in presenting a truly sceptical viewpoint.
DaveE.
H.R. says:
October 29, 2010 at 2:33 am
Not only protection from nutjobs. My employer reads this blog. All he has to is line up my name with the timestamp. Busted… 🙂
A poster’s comments should stand on it’s own merits, pseudonym or not.
God bless Anthony Watts. He alone is helping the IQ mean in Chico from falling into the negative territory.
I listened to several presenters. The Mayor or former mayor creates an intelligence negative anomaly. The students are not thinking clearly as are the people experienced in Commerce. Go figure.
A little paranoia to the contrary notwithstanding.
sarcasm on/
What do anonymous commenters and the following have in common?
Pick any or all of the following answers:
a) oh, nothing**
b) probably nothing**
c) absolutely nothing**
d) NOTHING-NOTHING-NOTHING**
** If you do not accept any of these answers then give us your real name, date of birth, identification number, email address, home address, telephone numbers and the same data for your wife and children. Do you have loved pets? Don’t be alarmed with the black helicopters show up.
No pressure. : )
sarcasm off/
John
@ Paulhan:
Really? Then what was the point? The claim is that Watts was “disinvited,” meaning that he was invited and then the invitation was retracted. I disagree that that’s even what happened. But if, for argument’s sake, I assume that it did, the question is then why was it retracted? It obviously wasn’t for the reason of technical inability to utilize a projector and computer.
With respect to Watts: the title of his post is: “The season of disinvitation continues: Chico State University can’t handle a slideshow.” This “disinvitation” meme is clearly and explicitly implying that the other side is afraid of a debate. Here it is that they are afraid of a debate with Watts plus slides. While Watts did not, in this post, say “they disinvited me because, with my slides they were afraid I’d be too powerful,” if you are contending that that is not the implication of the post title and the article, you have your head in the sand.
As to the comments:
<blockquotegrayman says:
October 27, 2010 at 2:24 pm
Anthony they only want vioces heard nothing visual as it might actually start to change a few minds. Sad really some ther might actually learn about real science!
<blockquotetarpon says:
October 27, 2010 at 4:07 pm
Sounds like they don’t want any facts to intrude on their seance.
etc.
Rob Ryan
Sorry for the “blockquote fails” above.
Rob Ryan
So who won this “debate”?
Yes, PA32R, it’s a strawman. You’re putting words in Anthony’s mouth. He didn’t say those things anywhere, either explicitly or implicitly. CSU had a perfect opportunity to inform people and they blew it with their silly games. And by all accounts, it turned out to be a farce. So a double waste of time.
As for what the other commenters wrote, they’re right, but those are their own words. If you want to read it as Anthony figuring he would devastate them with his presentation, well, that says more about you than him.
Anthony; tried watching but when my head hit the keyboard I gave up and went on to other things. Must be too used to Canadian political debates where prepared script, brass knuckles, hand guns and long knives are frowned upon.
“PJP says: Anthony, . . . As I read it they disinvited you based on an unwillingness to cater to a disability.
As I understand the law, this is almost certainly a serious criminal offense.”
Oh, how I wish you were right. Respectfully you are not. 30 years ago I was hired by a multinational firm. I worked in an office but basically I was a line worker. I answered to a superviser who answered to a manager who answered to a director, well you get the point
As companies are wont to do the layers of middle management got peeled off to where I answered to a director who answered to the VP. My title had not changed.
In March 2007 I sent an e-mail to the VP of HR, describing conduct in relation to my coworker and director. They both knew I had a progressive lung desease that would qualify me for a transplant. As was explained to me later, the letter implied a request for accomodations under the ADA.
This e-maii almost certainly got to legal which means the VP of North American Operations got it. There were no lay-offs at the time but my job was eliminated less than 1 & 1/2 months later at the insistence of the VP of NA, against the arguments of both my director and the VP of HR.
I immediately applied for SS disability & then went to 2 law firms: one which specialized in employment law. The employment lawyer told me that since I had applied for disability that if I got it the co. would only owe me back the 6 mos. till it kicked in & I had severance that breached that. She didn’t advise against pursuing it but said she would not. I went to the second firm and was told basically the same thing.
So no, unwillingness to accomodate someone in the most important area of all, employment, is not a serious offense. But I’ll bet refusal to accomodate green initiatives will be. With a resperatory illness I cherish my air cond. And the greens will wanna take it away to save people from AGW? I also pay a heavy elec. bill due to an O2 concentrator & a pump to fill O2 tanks with it. And Obama wants our elec. to ‘skyrocket’.
I’m gonna guess PA32R that you leave skimpy tips when you go out to eat.
So answer the question: what is the point of the headline “The season of disinvitation continues: Chico State University can’t handle a slideshow”?
If it’s not “they’re afraid to debate us fairly” then what is it?
Rob Ryan
I’m sorry for your illness and the consequent circumstances Judd, but there’s absolutely no connection between the personal situation you described and my comments on this post. And even if there were, what in the world does that have to do with my tipping behavior? Seriously, try to follow along.
Rob Ryan
PA32R says: October 29, 2010 at 9:00 am
So answer the question: what is the point of the headline “The season of disinvitation continues: Chico State University can’t handle a slideshow”?
If it’s not “they’re afraid to debate us fairly” then what is it?
“It” is actual data.
@ Tim Clark:
So if I understand, your claim is that the point of Watts’ headline and article is that CSUC would not let him present “actual data?” Or that I’d paraphrase the alleged contention as “CSUC disinvited Watts because he wanted to present actual data?”
Sorry, no sale.
Rob Ryan
I don’t post that often, but here’s why when I do, I do it anonymously:
By virtue of my job and employer, I am considered to be a “public official.” I work in an environmental field. A few years back I was subject to a vicious libel and slander campaign because my findings and position did not support that of our local environmental activists. The activists even managed to convince one outlet of our local media that based on only my job title, they were sure I played fast and loose with the data and manipulated outcomes of scientific analyses to support a predetermined agenda. (Of course they had no evidence whatsoever to support their notion because it was totally untrue.) The whole thing took a toll on me emotionally at the time (it was very hard to ignore), and I know that there was harm done to my reputation.
Fortunately for now, I have yet to be assigned to anything climate change related, for I am certain that if my positions on CAGW become publically known, I will be hit with severe criticisms again. I’m not ready for that. Until I am, I sign public blogs with an anonymous moniker.
Just delete Pa32r’s posts – we don’t need them here and why shouldn’t we censor like RealClimate does? All of us know he’s a moron.
REPLY: No, he’s not a moron, he just has a bad case of this affliction: http://xkcd.com/386/
– Anthony
PA32R, You’re starting to sound like a troll now, so this is the last reply from me. For far too long, the warmist community have stifled real debate about the issues and merits of Global Warming, Climate Change, Climate Disruption, call it what you will.
Between ClimateGate and the realisation that the science behind their claims is shoddy beyond belief, people don’t believe them anymore, yet we still see attempts by them to try and frame the debate in their own favour.
This CSU thing is another example of exactly that. Invite someone from the other side of the debate, and then deny them the chance to genuinely inform people. They get away with it because by and large they have the pursestrings, and the media and the politicians on their side turning a blind eye to it.
The reason they can’t handle a slideshow is because people like Anthony have done their homework, and are fully informed about the state of the science. The question any right-minded person should be asking is why does a university, a supposed centre of learning, not want to inform people. Answer that, and then you get to question us.
—
I’ve sampled some of the debate at Chico, and thus far I find nothing whatsoever to be impressed about, beginning with the quality of the introductory presentations made by the Mayor of the town (Ann Schwab), Provost Sandra Flake, et alia.
Particularly Sue Peterson, Director of the Speech and Debate Program at CSU Chico, who has that absolutely insufferable Californian tendency (as does Mayor Schwab to a lesser extent) to inflect just about every goddam declarative sentence as if it were an interrogatory.
Makes the thumbs to twitch with an urge to reach across the continent and close upon a windpipe or two.
The ineptitude of these “award winners” on the CSU Chico student speech and debate team is also altogether disquieting. These guys would have been dead meat as opponents (and other competitors) when I was doing debate and extemporaneous speaking in National Forensic League activities back in high school.
The first two speakers, for example – in support of the resolution and opposing – neither raise their eyes from their manuscripts nor vary from a deadly monotone, and throughout the content of their utterances fail to support their assertions with little other than appeals to authority, and stumble into a wealth of other logical fallacies which my debate team adviser would never have allowed me to bring into any such prepared presentation.
The second negative speaker actually not only reads verbatim from her prepared text but follows that text with her fingertip.
Is this the student who is supposed to be a pre-med major? An undergraduate interested eventually in practicing the profession of medicine?
Oh, my god.
Shall we begin discussing the next California ballot initiative? I suggest that the folks out there in the Golden State consider the immediate defunding of the California State University system, and letting it subside completely into bankruptcy and cease operations altogether.
—
@Paulhan:
I’m sure CSUC would be cynically bemused to hear how they control any pursestrings whatsoever.
In any case, not wanting to be accused of being a troll, I’ll depart the thread.
@Anthony:
Eeyup, I’m afflicted with SIWOTI syndrome. I’ve blogged about my flareups here and here.
Boy, things have changed since I was in college, you sure this isn’t the local high school?
I can’t figure out how a disease can be a “Stakeholder”, what are they teaching there?
How about a year of Econ & Biz required for their first year.
California is in need of some adult supervision.
@ Tucci78 October 29, 2010 at 4:29 pm
Hear hear, my dear sir. I concur completely!
“… that absolutely insufferable Californian tendency to inflect just about every goddam declarative sentence as if it were an interrogatory.
Makes the thumbs to twitch with an urge to reach across the continent and close upon a windpipe or two. ”
That vocal inflection and the vile abuse of that innocent word “like”, both cause my blood to boil!
Interesting article on Valero, the primary backer of Prop 23.
[Try to disregard the pseudo-science; it’s the LA Times, they can’t help themselves.]
Don’t worry, citizens of California.
James Cameron and Eric Schmidt are here to help you.
http://www.prisonplanet.com/james-cameron-and-google-ceo-questioning-warming-science-is-criminal.html
I know, it’s prisonplanet, but they have a video of the two philosophers working out the plan. Watch it. It’s good.
As the executive officer receives the hand note “come quick, bring packs”. The rest of the story is history.
How much did this College event cost$$$? Perhaps government would need to begin teaching themselves accounting 101, meaning all of the staff/resources included in such an event. Electricity$ alone?
Ms Peterson – “I believe that mistakes are the foundation of learning. I try to design my classes to provide a safe, but challenging environment, where students who are willing to take risks and learn from their mistakes are rewarded.”
Ms Peterson – “in order to use the valuable experience I had gained through my work with the Urban Debate League- Fulerton on the college level.” (why she returned to CSU)
If this event is what an accredited University (accountable to a body of intellectual sheriffs) is capable of producing for mass education, the world is not savable-compatible with a notion of common sense.
Aren’t there no order of school learnin? Dialectic – Didactic. I did listen to the one orator of skill (professional grand finale) that must have learned the art of debate outside of CSU.
My beliefs on why Prop 23 will not matter much, one way or the other, to California’s future. The ship of state is sinking with or without Prop 23. It’s only a question of when.
http://sowellslawblog.blogspot.com/2010/10/showdown-over-prop-23-and-ab-32-in.html