Replicating Al Gore's Climate 101 video experiment shows that his "high school physics" could never work as advertised

This will be a top “sticky” post for a day or two. New stories will appear below this one.

Readers may recall my previous essay where I pointed out how Mr. Gore’s Climate 101 Video, used in his “24 hours of climate reality”, had some serious credibility issues with editing things to make it appear as if they had actually performed the experiment, when they clearly did not. It has taken me awhile to replicate the experiment. Delays were a combination of acquisition and shipping problems, combined with my availability since I had to do this on nights and weekends. I worked initially using the original techniques and equipment, and I’ve replicated the Climate 101 experiment in other ways using improved equipment. I’ve compiled several videos. My report follows.

First. as a refresher, here’s the Climate 101 video again:

I direct your attention to the 1 minute mark, lasting through 1:30, where the experiment is presented.

And here’s my critique of it: Video analysis and scene replication suggests that Al Gore’s Climate Reality Project fabricated their Climate 101 video “Simple Experiment”

The most egregious faked presentation in that video was the scene with the split screen thermometers, edited to appear as if the temperature in the jar of elevated CO2 level was rising faster than the jar without elevated CO2 level.

It turns out that the thermometers were never in the jar recording the temperature rise presented in the split screen and the entire presentation was nothing but stagecraft and editing.

This was proven beyond a doubt by the photoshop differencing technique used to compare each side of the split screen. With the exception of the moving thermometer fluid, both sides were identical.

difference process run at full resolution - click to enlarge

Exposing this lie to the viewers didn’t set well with some people, include the supposed “fairness” watchdogs over at Media Matters, who called the analysis a “waste of time”. Of course it’s only a “waste of time” when you prove their man Gore was faking the whole thing, otherwise they wouldn’t care. Personally I consider it a badge of honor for them to take notice because they usually reserve such vitriol for high profile news they don’t like, so apparently I have “arrived”.

The reason why I took so much time then to show this chicanery was Mr. Gore’s pronouncement in an interview the day the video aired.

His specific claim was:

“The deniers claim that it’s some kind of hoax and that the global scientific community is lying to people,” he said. “It’s not a hoax, it’s high school physics.” – Al Gore in an interview with MNN 9/14/2011

So easy a high school kid can do it. Right?

Bill Nye, in his narration at 0:48 in the video says:

You can replicate this effect yourself in a simple lab experiment, here’s how.

…and at 1:10 in the video Nye says:

Within minutes you will see the temperature of the bottle with the carbon dioxide in it rising faster and higher.

So, I decided to find out if that was true and if anyone could really replicate that claim, or if this was just more stagecraft chicanery. I was betting that nobody on Gore’s production team actually did this experiment, or if they did do it, it wasn’t successful, because otherwise, why would they have to fake the results in post production?

The split screen video at 1:17, a screencap of which is a few paragraphs above shows a temperature difference of 2°F. Since Mr. Gore provided no other data, I’ll use that as the standard to meet for a successful experiment.

The first task is to get all the exact same equipment. Again, since Mr. Gore doesn’t provide anything other than the video, finding all of that took some significant effort and time. There’s no bill of materials to work with so I had to rely on finding each item from the visuals. While I found the cookie jars and oral thermometers early on, finding the lamp fixtures, the heat lamps for them, the CO2 tank and the CO2 tank valve proved to be more elusive. Surprisingly, the valve turned out to be the hardest of all items to locate, taking about two weeks from the time I started searching to the time I had located it, ordered it and it arrived. The reason? It isn’t called a valve, but rather a “In-Line On/Off Air Adapter”. Finding the terminology was half the battle. Another surprise was finding that the heat lamps and fixtures were for lizards and terrariums and not some general purpose use. Fortunately the fixtures and lamps were sold together by the same company. While the fixtures supported up to 150 watts, Mr. Gore made no specification on bulb type or wattage, so I chose the middle of the road 100 watt bulbs from the 50, 100, and 150 watt choices available.

I believe that I have done due diligence (as much as possible given no instructions from Gore) and located all the original equipment to accurately replicate the experiment as it was presented. Here’s the bill of materials and links to suppliers needed to replicate Al Gore’s experiment as it is shown in the Climate 101 video:



QTY 2 Anchor Hocking Cookie Jar with Lid

QTY2 Geratherm Oral Thermometer Non-Mercury

QTY 2 Globe Coin Bank

QTY 2 Fluker`s Repta Clamp-Lamp with Ceramic Sockets for Terrariums (max 150 watts, 8 1/2 Inch Bulb)

QTY2 Zoo Med Red Infrared Heat Lamp 100W

QTY1 Empire – Pure Energy – Aluminum Co2 Tank – 20 oz

QTY 1 RAP4 In-Line On/Off Air Adapter

QTY 1 flexible clear plastic hose, 48″ in length, from local Lowes hardware to fit RAP4 In-Line On/Off Air Adapter above.


Additionally, since Mr. Gore never actually proved that CO2 had been released from the CO2 paintball tank into one of the jars, I ordered a portable CO2 meter for just that purpose:

It has a CO2 metering accuracy of: ± 50ppm ±5% reading value. While not laboratory grade, it works well enough to prove the existence of elevated CO2 concentrations in one of the jars. It uses a non-dispersive infrared diffusion sensor (NDIR) which is self calibrating, which seems perfect for the job.

carbon dioxide temperature humidity monitorData Sheet


Once I got all of the equipment in, the job was to do some testing to make sure it all worked. I also wanted to be sure the two oral thermometers were calibrated such they read identically. For that, I prepared a water bath to conduct that experiment.

CAVEAT: For those that value form over substance, yes these are not slick professionally edited videos like Mr. Gore presented. They aren’t intended to be. They ARE intended to be a complete, accurate, and most importantly unedited record of the experimental work I performed. Bear in mind that while Mr. Gore has million$ to hire professional studios and editors, all I have is a consumer grade video camera, my office and my wits. If I were still working in broadcast television, you can bet I would have done this in the TV studio.


STEP 1 Calibrate the Oral Thermometers

Here’s my first video showing how I calibrated the oral thermometers, which is very important if you want to have an accurate experimental result.

Note that the two thermometers read 98.1°F at the conclusion of the test, as shown in this screencap from my video @ about 5:35:

STEP 2 Calibrate the Infrared Thermometer

Since I plan to make use of an electronic Infrared thermometer in these experiments, I decided to calibrate it against the water bath also. Some folks may see this as unnecessary, since it is pre-calibrated, but I decided to do it anyway. It makes for interesting viewing


STEP 3 Demonstrate how glass blocks IR using  the Infrared Thermometer

The way an actual greenhouse works is by trapping infrared radiation. Glass is transparent to visible light, but not to infrared light, as we see below.

Image from:

Mr. Gore was attempting to demonstrate this effect in his setup, but there’s an obvious problem: he used infrared heat lamps rather than visible light lamps. Thus, it seems highly likely that the glass jars would block the incoming infrared, and convert it to heat. That being the case, the infrared radiative backscattering effect that makes up the greenhouse effect in our atmosphere couldn’t possibly be demonstrated here in the Climate 101 video.

By itself, that would be enough to declare the experiment invalid, but not only will I show the problem of the experimental setup being flawed, I’ll go to full on replication.

Using the warm water bath and the infrared thermometer, it becomes easy to demonstrate this effect.

Since Mr. Gore’s experiment used infrared heat lamps illuminating two glass jars, I decided to test that as well:


STEP 4 Replicating Mr. Gore’s Climate 101 video experiment exactly, using the same equipment – duration of 10 minutes

At 1:10 in the Climate 101 video narrator Bill Nye the science guy says:

Within minutes you will see the temperature of the bottle with the carbon dioxide in it rising faster and higher.

Since this is “simple high school physics” according to Mr. Gore, this should be a cinch to replicate. I took a “within minutes” from the narration to be just that, so I tried an experiment with 10 minutes of duration. I also explain the experimental setup and using the CO2 meter prove that CO2 is in fact injected into Jar “B”. My apologies for the rambling dialog, which wasn’t scripted, but explained as I went along. And, the camera work is one-handed while I’m speaking and setting up the experiment, so what it lacks in production quality it makes up in reality.

You’ll note that after 10 minutes, it appears there was no change in either thermometer. Also, remember these are ORAL thermometers, which hold the reading (so you can take it out of your mouth and hand it to mom and ask “can I stay home from school today”?). So for anyone concerned about the length of time after I turned off the lamps, don’t be. In order to reset the thermometers you have to shake them to force the liquid back down into the bulb.

Here’s the screencaps of the two thermometer readings from Jar A and B:

Clearly, 10 minutes isn’t enough time for the experiment to work. So let’s scratch off the idea from narration of “a few minutes” and go for a longer period:

RESULT: No change, no difference in temperature. Nothing near the 2°F rise shown in the video. Inconclusive.


STEP 5 Replicating Mr. Gore’s Climate 101 video experiment exactly, using the same equipment – duration of 30 minutes

Ok, identical setup as before, the only difference is time, the experiment runs 30 minutes long. I’ve added a digital timer you can watch as the experiment progresses.

And here are the screencaps from the video above of the results:

RESULT: slight rise and difference in temperature 97.4°F for Jar “A” Air, and 97.2°F for Jar “B” CO2. Nothing near the 2°F rise shown in the video.


STEP 6 Replicating Mr. Gore’s Climate 101 video experiment, using digital logging thermometer – duration of 30 minutes

In this experiment, I’m substituting the liquid in glass oral thermometers with some small self contained battery powered digital logging thermometers with LCD displays.

This model:

Details here

Specification Sheet / Manual

USB-2-LCD+ Temperature Datalogger

I used two identical units in the experiment replication:

And here are the results graphed by the application that comes with the datalogger. Red is Temperature, Blue is Humidity, Green is dewpoint

The graphs are automatically different vertical scales and thus can be a bit confusing, so I’ve take the raw data for each and graphed temperature only:

After watching my own video, I was concerned that maybe I was getting a bit of a direct line of the visible portion of the heat lamp into the sensor housing onto the thermistor, since they were turned on their side. So I ran the experiment again with the dataloggers mounted vertically in paper cups to ensure the thermistors were shielded from any direct radiation at any wavelength. See this video:

Both runs of the USB datalogger are graphed together below:


Run 1 slight rise and difference in temperature 43.5°C for Jar “A” Air with Brief pulse to 44°C , and 43.0°C for Jar “B” CO2.

Run 2 had an ended with a 1°C difference, with plain air in Jar A being warmer than Jar “B with CO2.

Jar “A” Air temperature led Jar “B” CO2 during the entire experiment on both runs

The datalogger output files are available here:

JarA Air only run1.txt  JarB CO2 run1.txt

JarA Air only run2.txt JarB CO2 run2.txt


STEP 7 Replicating Mr. Gore’s Climate 101 video experiment exactly, using a high resolution NIST calibrated digital logging thermometer – duration of 30 minutes

In this experiment I use a high resolution (0.1F resolution) and NIST calibrated data logger with calibrated probes. Data was collected over my LAN to special software. This is the datalogger model:

Data sheet: Model E Series And the software used to log data is described here

Here’s the experiment:

I had to spend a lot of time waiting for the Jar “B” probe to come to parity with Jar “A” due to the cooling effect of the CO2 I introduced. As we all know, when a gas expands it cools, and that’s exactly what happens to CO2 released under pressure. You can see the effect early in the flat area of the graph below.

Here’s the end result screencap real-time graphing software used in the experiment, click the image to expand the graph full size.


Peak value Jar A with air  was at 18:04 117.3°F

Peak value Jar B with CO2 was at 18:04 116.7°F

Once again, air led CO2 through the entire experiment.

Note that I allowed this experiment to go through a cool down after I turned off the Infrared heat lamps, which is the slope after the peak. Interestingly, while Jar “A” (probe1 in green) with Air, led Jar “B” (Probe 2 in red) with CO2, the positions reversed shortly after the lamps turned off.

The CO2 filled jar was now losing heat slower than the plain air jar, even though plain air Jar “A” had warmed slightly faster than the CO2 Jar “B”.

Here’s the datalogger output files for each probe:

Climate101-replication-Probe01-(JarA – Air).csv

Climate101-replication-Probe02-(JarB – CO2).csv

Climate101-replication-Probe03-(Ambient Air).csv

What could explain this reversal after the lamps were turned off? The answer is here at the Engineer’s Edge in the form of this table:

Heat Transfer Table of Content

This chart gives the thermal conductivity of gases as a function of temperature.

Unless otherwise noted, the values refer to a pressure of 100 kPa (1 bar) or to the saturation vapor pressure if that is less than 100 kPa.

The notation P = 0 indicates the low pressure limiting value is given. In general, the P = 0 and P = 100 kPa values differ by less than 1%.

Units are milliwatts per meter kelvin.

Note the values for Air and for CO2 that I highlighted in the 300K column. 300K is 80.3°F.

Air is a better conductor of heat than CO2.


So, here is what I think is going on with Mr. Gore’s Climate 101 experiment.

  1. As we know, the Climate101 video used infrared heat lamps
  2. The glass cookie jars chosen don’t allow the full measure of infrared from the lamps to enter the center of the jar and affect the gas. I showed this two different ways with the infrared camera in videos above.
  3. During the experiments, I showed the glass jars heating up using the infrared camera. Clearly they were absorbing the infrared energy from the lamps.
  4. The gases inside the jars, air and pure CO2 thus had to be heated by secondary heat emission from the glass as it was being heated. They were not absorbing infrared from the lamps, but rather heat from contact with the glass.
  5. Per the engineering table, air is a better conductor of heat than pure CO2, so it warms faster, and when the lamps are turned off, it cools faster.
  6. The difference value of 2°F shown in the Climate 101 video split screen was never met in any of the experiments I performed.
  7. The condition stated in the Climate 101 video of “Within minutes you will see the temperature of the bottle with the carbon dioxide in it rising faster and higher.” was not met in any of the experiments I performed. In fact it was exactly the opposite. Air consistently warmed faster than CO2.
  8. Thus, the experiment as designed by Mr. Gore does not show the greenhouse effect as we know it in our atmosphere, it does show how heat transfer works and differences in heat transfer rates with different substances, but nothing else.

Mr. Gore’s Climate 101 experiment is falsified, and could not work given the equipment he specified. If they actually tried to perform the experiment themselves, perhaps this is why they had to resort to stagecraft in the studio to fake the temperature rise on the split screen thermometers.

The experiment as presented by Al Gore and Bill Nye “the science guy” is a failure, and not representative of the greenhouse effect related to CO2 in our atmosphere. The video as presented, is not only faked in post production, the premise is also false and could never work with the equipment they demonstrated. Even with superior measurement equipment it doesn’t work, but more importantly, it couldn’t work as advertised.

The design failure was the glass cookie jar combined with infrared heat lamps.

Gore FAIL.


UPDATE: 4PM PST Some commenters are taking away far more than intended from this essay. Therefore I am repeating this caveat I posted in my first essay where I concentrated on the video editing and stagecraft issues:

I should make it clear that I’m not doubting that CO2 has a positive radiative heating effect in our atmosphere, due to LWIR re-radiation, that is well established by science. What I am saying is that Mr. Gore’s Climate Reality Project did a poor job of demonstrating an experiment, so poor in fact that they had to fabricate portions of the presentation, and that the experiment itself (if they actually did it, we can’t tell) would show a completely different physical mechanism than what actually occurs in our atmosphere.

No broader take away (other than the experiment was faked and fails) was intended, expressed or implied – Anthony


newest oldest most voted
Notify of

Well it is complicated after all.

Nye FAIL too.

Willis Eschenbach

Very sweet, Anthony, an epic deconstruction. One of the reasons I write for this site is that you are not only writing about this stuff. You are doing original scientific experiments and analyses.
My congratulations,

good work.

So basically what you discovered is that had Gore and Nye performed this experiment, they would have “proven” CO2 is a cooling agent in the atmosphere. Of course we know CO2 does not do that unless it displaces Water Vapor or Methane in the atmosphere.

…so are there no broadcast standard authorities to complain to over there???
Brillian detective work – way to go – better than any dog with a bone

Doede Rensema

Hi Anthony,
Great post again!
I think I found a tiny mistake, in the conclusions you state in point 5 that air warms faster and cools slower, shouldn’t that be cools faster?

Yup, typo, fixed, thanks. – Anthony


Oh ohh…. I can clearly see an A in a jar labled


This is emblematic of AGW in a nutshell, a flawed theory based on shoddy “science”, presented as fact, but a fraud in reality.


Blast!!!! B

Ben M

you should invite Gore to either tell you what you’re missing from the experiment, or to put up the raw footage fom his experiment.


Anthony your dedication to the subject matter and thoroughness of your approach is a credit to yourself and an example to the world at large. This is real science done in the correct way.


Now I see…. the thermometer FROM JAR B is in front of jar A. Sorry for my confusion.

Falsification – one of my favourite words! Very well done Anthony. Thank God you are doing these things – most of the rest of the ‘scientific community seems dumbstruck by its devotion to the faith…


This shows Nye is a fraud too.
REPLY: Not necessarily, he may have been given a voice over script to read in a studio in Los Angeles and the audio sent out. The video was shot in Brooklyn. He may have assumed that due diligence was being done by Gore and his video producers. Maybe somebody can bring this to Nye’s attention and we can get the full story as to whether he had any hand in the experiment or simply served as a voice over agent – Anthony

Well done, Anthony! Amazing. Your test in your “laboratory” (home)
In spite of such clear scientific evidence, which I am sure anyone can easily repeat in a college- or university lab. environment, I continue to be amazed why people keep on believing the lie that CO2 causes warming of the planet.
Clearly you have exposed Al Gore again.
I have always said that the closed box experiment is not really valid, as,
1) there is some warming caused by the CO2, by re-radiation of earth light, 14-16 um
2) there is some cooling caused by the CO2, by re-radiation of sun light, @various wavelengths, between 0-5 um.
3) there is some cooling caused by the CO2 by taking part in the photosynthesis (plants and trees need warmth to grow )
4) there is some warming happening again due to increased vegetation (heat being trapped), which could be partly due to 1) human intervention, 2) increased CO2.
The only way to determine what the net effect is of the increase in CO2 is looking at historical weather data as I have done and by recording the ratio’s of the 3 M’s….Maxima-Means-Minima: My current sample shows that the ratio of these is 9:3:1,
meaning there is no”entrapment of heat due to an increase in GHG’s. It is the increase in maxima pushing up the average temps. + a small % of that extra being trapped by additional vegetation.
Would also only take a few stats classes of students at university to copy my work (to check) and do a lot more.
Surely, it is not us who is in denial, it is the mad world and our educational institutions who are in denial. Anthony, you can bring a horse to the water, but we cannot make him drink.
Strongly recommended: a new book exposing the dreadful IPCC and its perversion of science. The author, Donna Laframboise, compares the IPCC with a “Delinquent Teenager”, spoiled, indulged, never questioned, and so corrupted. It’s only 100 pages long but gives plenty of info’ as to what has gone wrong with the IPCC. She explains that although the politicians and big media fawn before it as the authoritative voice of science, it is actually just venal junkscience.


Now will someone explain to Mythbusters why their experiment sucked and was no better than the Gore fraud.


Good to see a proper experiment done.
I saddens me that media manipulate everything so much and this help politicians push their view of the world.
This should be a warning to us all as this is not just a leftwing thing it was done both in Germany and Russia in the 1930’s and 1940’s.
We need to be on our guard as the world is again entering a economic climate like the 1930’s which may bring about the rise of demagogues both on the left and the right (from a UK point of view this looks like this is already happening in the US with both left and right which is very sad and worrying). You have a great country and you were so fortunate to have Franklin D Roosevelt in the 1930’s as he guided the ship through troubled waters and the rise of the US after the WWII to stand up to Soviet aggression is a testament to how great a president he was, as he laid the foundation (my family was directly effected by soviet expansion which kept us apart for 40 years and I never met my paternal grandparents as they died in a siberian concentration camp).
Keep your eyes wide open and do not be manipulated by leftwing or rightwing propaganda we are the last of the literal generations, but our Achilles heel is propaganda be very aware of how easily you can be taken in, every time you see something you need to ask yourself does this agree with what I know to be a fact or does it appeal to something that i want/fear. If it is the want/fear beware you are being potentially manipulated (as I was in the early 2000’s about AGW then I did the calculations as shown in the experiment above and realised it was wrong, someone pushing their own agenda on me by propaganda preying on my desire not to damage the world around me). You have been warned 😮


There was no reason for Gore to verify it in the real world by actually doing the experiment. The science was already settled.


What I would do, is get both jars going with air first, and then see if they are the same temp. Adjust the distance from the heat source to make sure they both get the same temp (in the jar). It doesn’t matter if they are different distances, it’s the temp that your measuring. Then add satanic gas to B without moving anything. If you did this then you have ruled out most of the experiemental error.
If you didn’t, it doesn’t really matter. Knows all, Sees all. All hail the Goricle.

Bill Jamison

Has anyone tried asking Bill Nye for information regarding how to exactly replicate the experiment? It seems like that would be a good first step. If it’s a valid experiment then it should be easily reproducible given clear instructions. Obviously it wasn’t reproducible at all here.

Jeff D

I curse you Anthony, I was just heading off to bed and now 45 minutes later I might be able to do just that.
Well done!!
Gore was right a simple home experiment can prove him opps wrong? lol
Wish I had an email to Bill Nye, he really needs to see this.


Good work, Inspector Watts! Brilliant! Present this to the jury and you’ve got a conviction.
I’m sure your results will be judged by a jury of your peers in the following comments.
And remember, Gore made it all possible!


Not only did you prove Al Gore to be a fake, you also ‘proved’ CO2 causes cooling! 🙂

Michael Wassil

Why don’t you send this to the “team”. They seem to be labouring under some misconceptions as well. Plus, it would do them good to see how real scientific experiments are done. I think they all probably skipped lab while in school.

First, I say hats off to Anthony for doing and demonstrating to the usual trolls here what to expect from real lab work. For example: I am curious if Gore et al took the time to establish equality between the two jars (obvious answer: NO) Anthony: “I had to spend a lot of time waiting for the Jar “B” probe to come to parity with Jar “A” due to the cooling effect of the CO2 I introduced.”
Secondly, in tooting my own horn, recall in the original post here, I suspected that in doing such an experiment there would be no difference in the temperature in the two jars.
Thirdly, we all performed experiments in lab that were both qualitative and quantitative; none of which were as low-base as the Gorelatory example of his style of high school science.
Finally, I find it interesting that you actually took the time to replicate the Gore blasphemy and commend you for, as so well put by Willis, in “deconstructing” such garbage. Gratitude abounds.

“The way an actual greenhouse works is by tapping infrared radiation. ”
No, real greenhouse works by preventing the escape of warm air up. Proved by Wood experiment and replicated by Nasif Nahle here.

Jeff D

I agree that the CO2 bottle for the untrained is dangerous but if people use the baking soda / vinegar version of creating CO2 it will increase the humidity in the container which could skew the test. It is possible that the high humidity in the B jar will conduct heat better and change the results. If you have the time and the gear still laying around I would love to see that experiment as well.


So while showing how this “experiment” was a complete farce, you brought up a question for me.
If an increased concetration of CO₂ acts as an insulator by slowing the cooling of an air mixture, wouldn’t this slow nighttime cooling, which would typically lead to a higher low temp for the day? Thus leading to the thought process of a warmer low temperature for each day even with the same high temps could be a factor to how the average temp for a month/year could be officially going up.
REPLY: No, remember the CO2 in the jar is saturation, not at 390ppm like our atmosphere, big difference. The heat tables are for saturation at sea level at 300 kelvin – Anthony

Good work.
I remember the experiment conducted to demonstrate the Steve Goddard/co2 claims a couple of years back.
I wonder if there are any more simple 101 type experiments out there waiting to be done-they are a demonstration of observable sxience in action as well as a graphic deconstruction of high profile claims.

The comments on Media Matters are now even more delicious, it is almost as though the delay in announcing the results of repeating the experiment was there to give them enough rope, and now it is time to reel them in. Anyone volunteer to go over there and break the news to them?

Bob the swiss

Gore is a [snip we don’t like people calling us that name, let’s not reciprocate -Anthony]

Brian H

Edit (typo); “In fcat it was exactly the opposite.”
I wonder how the experiment would have gone if plexiglass(?) or suitable IR-transparent jars or containers were used.
REPLY: Already fixed, refresh – A

John Wright

October 19, 2011 at 12:03 am
I’d be interested to know what you mean exactly by “literal” generations. (Perhaps because I’m part of it)



Ian Macmillan

Its good to see a valid scientific experiment done without massive laboratory facilities, and which certainly shows the flaws in the faked Gore demonstration.
However who would ever take any notice of so-called science done by a evil denier over that performed by a Famous Nobel Prize winner. Phooi!

kadaka (KD Knoebel)

Typo, Step 3:
The way an actual greenhouse works is by tapping infrared radiation.
BTW, Great job.
REPLY: Typo fixed thanks – A

I dont know what to say Anthony, first you keep track of the blog, writings, science, temperature stations, and my oh my, you also perform practical tests in your home!!
Now this is the spirit of a true scientist!
And then youwrite:
“if they did do it, it wasn’t successful, because otherwise, why would they have to fake the results in post production”
Yes, spot on.
This made my day, thankyou 🙂


I’m looking at the first 2 graphs of temp vs humidity vs dewpoint. Interesting observations w/ regards to dew point and relative humidity between A and B. I need to think about this for a while. The CO2 replaced some of the air / H2O at start. Why the bumps in humidity and dewpoint near end?
What is the vertical lavindar colored line in A?
You should seriously apply for a grant to replicate your work on a bigger scale using your technique. Perhaps a pair of 8x8x8 glass ‘houses’ set outside in a field and use natural sunlight. Vary CO2 levels and H2O contents. This could possibly result in some very scientific results to better understand the principles of atmospheric phenomenon.
You should be the one to perform this as apparantly none of the so called ‘climate scientist’ view anything other than a cookie jar (pun intended).

Lid removal at the end and moving dataloggers to USB port caused the bumps, can’t stop it until you connect – Anthony


Not only does Gore FAIL but Gore FUDGES, FABRICATES, LIES and DECEIVES.
Much as he did in his Inconvenient Lies.
Surely he has broken some law?

Peter Plail

Anthony, do you have any links with local schools? Could they be persuaded to undertake the experiments for themselves using your equipment (so no cost to the school). Mr Gore suggests that it is a simple enough experiment and I am sure it would be a valuable contribution to the children’s science (or should that be politics) curriculum.
Now, if you could persuade your local TV or press to cover it too………..

Anthony, I was blown away by your dedication and attention to detail in the experiment. I loved the thoroughness of your approach. It is a credit to yourself and an example to the world at large on how to conduct an experimental check of scientific statements. What a pleasure it is to see some real science done in the correct way at last. How delightful an outcome it was.
Nicholas Tesdorf

UK Sceptic

I give your series of recreated Gore Lies Climate 101 experiments an F – for falsified!
Well done Anthony.

Steve C

Within minutes (well, apart from tracking down some pretty “non-standard” apparatus …), you have confirmed with careful experimentation what we suspected all along … and, in the spirit of Feynman, listed what you felt were weaknesses so that others can better understand. Good work, even in replicating a shoddy and faked “experiment”.
Y’know, it occurs to me that, if only for the time she lets you spend on all this, Mrs. W. must be a strong contender for sainthood.

Your do great work. You are a hero of mine. Your attention to detail and dedication to checking on the experiment in the Al Gore video is an example of your exceptionalism. Thank you.
You have suggested Mr Nye may have not have known he was fronting for a staged experiment. I wonder if Al Gore may also having been only presenting from a script written by others. I cannot see him going through the process of doing the experiment himself. Of course, ignorance is no excuse and would only further diminish his credibility.


FDR was rather a crook. threatened the Supreme Court when he couldn’t get his way(tried to add 5 new justices iirc) and had a general disregard for the Constitution and the rule of law. Sound familiar?
Btw i will soon be peddling my own “Climate 101” series of videos. I am neither a meteorologist nor a climatologist but that doesn’t appear to matter anyway. I’m sure i will be taken quite seriously by the media and scientific community as long as i spout the party line. 🙂


If he thinks it’s millions of degrees hotter just meteres below the planet’s crust, why would you trust him when he proclaims “It’s high school physics!”???


Full marks for comprehensively demolishing Al Gore’s experiment.
I suggest, however that the interpretation of the heating and cooling rates depends more on the relative thermal capacities of air and CO2 rather than their relative thermal conductivities.

These are only two little words but they are offered with some emotion – thank you.


The BBC version of this experiment used two empty 2L plastic pop bottles, and used an ordinary 100W incandescent light as the heat source. Plastic of course behaves differently from glass, and using a source close to sunlight is better than IR heat lamps.
I wonder why Al Gore’s team specifically chose to get these elements of the experiment wrong?