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
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
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?