People send me stuff.
Finally … finally! … a person trained by Al Gore’s Climate Reality Project agreed to face off in a public debate on global warming. As WUWT readers may know, trying to get one of these folks to debate a skeptic has been an impossible task…until now. Full video follows, running about 59 minutes.
While I don’t know the details, I suspect the video quality has to do with an apparent long standing policy of Gore’s presenters refusing to allow their presentations to be video taped. My impression is that this appears to be a clandestine recording made by an audience member.
From an email I received:
============================================================
Al Gore’s Climate Reality Project squared off against The Heartland Institute in a global warming debate January 8 in Tallahassee, Florida. More than 260 people attended the hour-long debate, which resulted in standing room only at the Tallahassee Elks Club Lodge, which hosted the debate.
Ray Bellamy, a Florida State University faculty member who gives public presentations on behalf of Al Gore’s Climate Reality Project, argued humans are causing a global warming crisis. Taylor countered that global warming activists have proven none of four important factors they need to show in order to demonstrate a human-induced global warming crisis.
“I am very happy that this debate is now available on the Internet so people can see the for themselves, without having to wade through media filters, who possesses and presents the best evidence in a fair and balanced debate,” said Taylor.
“I encourage people to watch the debate and then share it with friends, family and acquaintances. So long as people have access to the truth, I believe the truth will always prevail,” said Taylor.
=============================================================
Source: Alyssa Carducci
The YouTube page says:
Heartland Institute Senior Fellow James Taylor debates Ray Bellamy, M.D., a Tallahassee Orthopedic Surgeon at the Elks Club Lodge at 276 North Magnolia Drive in Tallahassee, Florida on Jan. 8, 2013.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
They mentioned the heat in Australia a few times. Living in Melbourne (runs close 2nd to Australia’s biggest city) the MSM are talking-up “Heat waves”. This summer, so far we’ve had 3 days over 38C (the old 100F).
By the MSM’s new definition of “heat wave” (one hot day in a row), and all the increased hysteria, we’ve had 3 heat waves this summer (one in Dec last year and 2 in Jan). These single days have all been separated by many days of cold. Today, I need a jumper. The kids are on summer holidays and wouldn’t mind a few “heat waves” in a row.
February and March are still coming – what will the MSM call it when we do get a few hot days in a row?
@commieBob says:
Thank you! I am a bit leery about wiki, but it is a start.
This is what SNOW sounds like k.
S. Meyer,
Both the Koch brothers and Heartland put out statements that said that Koch brothers had made a one time donation of $25,000 for Healthcare research and that was the only donation that has been made. The claim that Heartland received $200,000 from Koch brothers for climate research is a lie that was part of Peter Gleick’s fraudulent letter and stolen Heartland documents. You should find what you need here, at Heartland, or you can wade through a Google search.
[snip . . OT . . mod]
[snip . . OT . . mod]
That was massacre not a debate. On the Mark Morano Newnight a***ole thing I can claim to have been the person who brought this to Mark’s attention by emailing him just after watching the programme live.
[snip . . site rules . . mod]
[snip . . OT . . mod]
January 12, 2013 at 12:47 pm | Dr Burns says:
[ … ] Al Gore is not stupid, otherwise he wouldn’t have made so much money from the scam. He is not so stupid as to get into a losing debate like this.
——————
He just found a lot more people more stupid than he is … stupidity not being equated to his ability to fleece his flock of their money. No doubt he has found it increasingly difficult as is demonstrated by his selling out the TV station and its employees.
Off Topic? throwing rules at people now are we?
[You seem like a decent enough fellow but there are rules here http://wattsupwiththat.com/about-wuwt/policy/ and our job is to enforce them in a low key and light handed way. Posting up clips from that most excellent movie does nothing for the thread frankly. thanks . . mod]
This a little O/T, but look who Al Gore and the IPCC beat to the 2007 Nobel Peace Prize.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Irena_Sendler
Gail, I”m aware of the petition. However it’s been largely ignored/dismissed by warmists as untrustworthy. And they have a point since something like that could be falsified. I’m talking about a valid, statistically sound poll.
Just to add, I take your point about entrenched corruption. But this is not a good reason not to try. Every added bit of truth and light is helpful it seems to me.
James Taylor,
You’ve got a friend. 🙂 Well done. Apart from anything else the quality of your delivery far exceeded that of your opponent. Very professional. You were crisp and on the ball. He just bumbled on, eventually into incoherence. Laughable. But I’m guessing his skill at orthopaedic surgery misled him into lazily thinking he was giant among men and could easily pontificate on any matter. You’d think he’d have the sense to know better.
As far as I’m concerned you won hands down. But I also note what others say here about Dr Homespun and his appeal to the ordinary Joe. It surprises me but I’ve been unpleasantly surprised like that before. I never thought people could fall for that blatant creep, Tony Bliar, but they did — not just once but three times.
Mr Lynn says:
Sold! You make a very good case there. I like ‘climatist’. I intend to use it.
You should get a job in sales. You’d do well. 🙂
u,k,(us) says:
January 12, 2013 at 9:29 pm
Joe says:
January 12, 2013 at 2:49 pm
==========
Nice comment, the feeling is mutual I’m sure.
—————————————————————————————–
It very likely is mutual and that was the point of my comment.
Anna came on here showing clear dislike of, and bias against, the sort of person she assumes frequents the place. Several posters did a pretty good job of confirming that bias within minutes.
But truth doesn’t care about politics, or personal likes or dislikes. Truth simply IS.
If Saddam Hussein had gone on record as being an AGW sceptic, would the fact he was a thoroughly nasty piece of work (by anyones standards) have affected your view of the matter? What about if Al Gore pops up tomorrow and says it was all a big mistake? Will you switch to believing in AGW just because of who he is?
Whether or not I like your life view, or you like mine, is completely irrelevant to whether or not we’re causing dangerous warming. Being open about that might just lead Anna, or others like her, to look at the whole evidence..
Anna says: January 12, 2013 at 1:39 pm
“…… Soon when a large storm comes barreling through Tallahasse, and you are picking through the pieces, remember what you wrote in this blog site. I will….”
Anna.
You erred on the standard format:
Surely you meant; “..an unprecedented large storm.. … well, unprecedented since the date of the last one….”
Could not someone organise a Heartland debate with Mark Lynas, a keen supporter of the AGW position, but also seems to be capable of presenting a clear argument, see his reversal about GM crops: http://www.marklynas.org/2013/01/lecture-to-oxford-farming-conference-3-january-2013/
James Taylor did a great job. I wish that when confronted by people who shout “liar” from the audience when presenting factual data, that they would stop andromptly put that “Hey, it’s not about me – this data is from NASA, or NOAA, or whatever. I didn’t make this up. Are you calling these agencies/scientists liars?” The warmists are so addicted to faith-data (“This is the hottest year EVER!!”) and the warming meme that they are unable to believe real data even when it is put in front of their eyes. I seem to remember that when Galileo showed his telescope to the Pope, the Pope refused to look through it, presumably because it might shake his faith. Some in this audience were very Pope-like.
“Eric H. says:
January 12, 2013 at 11:15 pm
S. Meyer,
Both the Koch brothers and Heartland put out statements that said that Koch brothers had made a one time donation of $25,000 for Healthcare research and that was the only donation that has been made. The claim that Heartland received $200,000 from Koch brothers for climate research is a lie that was part of Peter Gleick’s fraudulent letter and stolen Heartland documents. You should find what you need here, at Heartland, or you can wade through a Google search.”
Thank you, Eric. I had looked at the Heartland Institute website before, but did not see the part about funding in the “about” section.
Call me naive, but I am impressed by their straightforward attitude about this. There is even a published tax return. And they do operate on a shoestring budget.
I don’t agree with most of Heartland’s non-climate activities, but that is beside the point. I think, once you can convince yourself that your discussant has integrity (e.g. an argument is not intentionally misleading, or comes from fabricated data), you stop looking at who says it, and instead look at what is said.
“When he said that a major issue of warming could be cancellation of ball games because of lightning strikes I inwardly curled up.”
So, CO2 is the “control knob” for lightning or lightning strike locations?..
“kramer says:
January 13, 2013 at 8:14 am
So, CO2 is the “control knob” for lightning or lightning strike locations?”
It wouldn’t surprise me to some extent, but then I find Willis’s Thermostat Hypothesis quite convincing.
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/06/14/the-thermostat-hypothesis/
Dr. Bellamy is one hell of a surgeon and a nice guy too boot. I have nothing to say beyond that.
Sparks says:
January 13, 2013 at 1:54 am
Off Topic? throwing rules at people now are we?
[You seem like a decent enough fellow but there are rules here http://wattsupwiththat.com/about-wuwt/policy/ and our job is to enforce them in a low key and light handed way. Posting up clips from that most excellent movie does nothing for the thread frankly. thanks . . mod]
=========================================================================
Hi Sparks. I don’t know what you said that was snipped but I got the same “treatment”, from REP no less. I’d venture to say that whatever was snipped wasn’t for “censoreship” but rather the post’s continuity. Sometimes the “line” does get fuzzy but remember that the Mods are as human as you are. Don’t take a “snip” personnally. Here’s part of my first comment I made on this post.
Gunga Din says:
January 12, 2013 at 12:53 pm
I just finished watching the debate.
As a compliment to this site, I didn’t hear one thing from either side I hadn’t already heard here.
Can that be said of the pro-CAGW sites? (I don’t frequent them so I personnally can’t say.)