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
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”.