From July 13th 2013 in Houston. I was invited to give a presentation, and I adapted Dr. Matt Ridley’s excellent essay: A Lukewarmer’s Ten Tests and added supporting graphs and commentary along with my own work and findings. The video follows.
The video is 53 minutes long including Q&A.
I’m sure some people won’t like what I have to say, and/or will take issue with it. For those that will immediately pounce on the location, Houston, to suggest “big oil” was involved, I’ll provide full disclosure. There was mostly an aerospace interest due to Houston’s role in the space program, there was not a hint of the oil industry there.
I received airfare compensation, meals, and lodging, plus $250 for my three days of time (two of which were travel) for speaking. Compare that to what Al Gore gets.
I welcome suggestions readers might have for improvements to the presentation.
Other related videos include:
57:52 
1:00:44 
52:10
Another point: here is a weather station on cinderstone. Why is it important? Something like “instead of grass which absorbs and uses the energy, or white that reflects it, it is absorbing and storing all that heat to release it at night.” Maybe people get that, but it oughtn’t to take too long to explain, and it adds weight to the citing issues you are very concerned about.
I personally don’t appreciate your note on anomalies vs. absolute temperature in degrees K. The importance of temperature differences is the impact to people, not how much it is. Not sure how to fix this. It has too much uncertainty, in my view. Perhaps “What is normal for earth temperatures?” Hard to do, for sure. The Chicago slide of record temps was not understandable in the short time you had it up there.
Next, you should pause at the end of transitioning between topics (not slides). It feels like a force feed, affording no oppty to reflect.
You complained about non-zero based graphs with regards to temperatures, but put up a similar slide for water vapor. It reminded me I think your anomalies vs. absolute temperature graph is not convincing on reflection.
On presentation giving, anyone can read a slide. On the slide “The role of aerosols”, I would put bullets, and if the presentation is going to be shared, put the text in smaller font.
Note, you ought to say the heat differential is causing client scientists to try to find the missing heat. They know it is there because of their AHA moment.
Loved your note about Thorium vs. uranium plutonium, and how that was on account of bombs. Incredibly powerful. I continue to think you are at your best when you are talking to the audience and not reading slides.
It would be interesting to point out if we ruing the US economy, we will push production to C02 intensive China.
That’s all. Great presentation. The activist nature of what you did with surveying the siting vs. is a David and Goliath story. It comes across really well.
Many great things to say about the presentation, I’ve mostly limited my comments to areas that struck me as perhaps being improvable.
@RockyRoad
“Truth is free -”
Socialist dogma. Privatized truth at market rates is more efficient and truer.
“You’ll note Anthony hasn’t charged anybody here a single cent to watch this.”
He’s a communist.
Incidentally, Anthony, very well done. I’d like to see this on mainstream TV as well as You Tube.
(And I was pleased to hear you say “unprecedented” instead of the horrible “unpreeeeercedented”.)
Anthony, I very much enjoyed your presentation, especially the first part which shows that you are at least as concerned about the environment than many of these “green” boys and girls. Not to mention dear Al Gore, whose “ecological footprint” is many times what the average American consumes. Hear my words, but don’t look at my deeds…
BTW, the presentation Al Gore did in the Netherlands a few years ago was good for a fee of 100,000 euro, or some 125,000 dollar. Seems that you are somewhat underpayed…
Thanks Anthony, just watched it. I hope you get more opportunities to spread the message. There is an immense amount of information that could be discussed such as solar and ocean effects, etc.. that it must be hard to decide in which areas to focus on. Your relaxed way of talking, without vitriolic attacks on those opposed to your opinion, will help people to think a bit more before they believe everything the media tells them. The more people are aware of these issues (such as UHI) then the more people think about the origins of the data, and that means we will get better more accurate results in the future. Why not team up with some other guys and do a road show across the US? I am sure there would be many institutions out there which would love to have you.
Thanks for posting the video presentation, Anthony – as a non scientist/engineer/climatologist (i.e. just an ordinary ‘bloke’) I appreciated your clear delivery, your understandable explanations and your humour. It’s great to be invited to watch and listen to a level-headed, informed talk such as this. One of the best I’ve seen in a long while – and easily on a par with Monckton for sheer viewing pleasure.
Fantastic presentation, Anthony.
It was a joy to see how you used the scientific method to see the obvious. Or what should have been obvious, but few people were looking at. You really highlighted the huge problems with the surface-temperature records. It’s easy to forget just how bad they are.
Surprisingly, they seem worse now than 100 years ago.
Way, way off topic. I did not know you were a Purdue alum. I am GaTech thru and thru. I have suggested to no less a personage then the AD of GaTech that they schedule a home and home football series between the No. 1 engineering school in the SE and one of the best, if not the, No. 1, engineering schools in the Midwest. Perhaps you could put in a word with the Purdue AD. It seems like a no brainer.
Anthony
This was an excellent talk. Unfortunately it seemed to be to the converted. Have you tried pitching this to a more “hostile” audience? And if so how did it go down?
“I’ll provide full disclosure. There was mostly an aerospace interest due to Houston’s role in the space program, there was not a hint of the oil industry there.”
That is NOT full disclosure.
Who was the Aerospace interest? Who covered for what the ‘aerospace interest’ didn’t? Not a hint of oil industry? I guess we’ll just have to take your weord for that.
Not going for complex conspiracy. Just wondering why you would say you would provide full disclosure and then procide to obsficate.
REPLY: I was talking about my reimbursement in the paragraph below. There were several speakers and attendees from aerospace, including a tour of a local rocket company startup. It is in the program here: http://www.ddponline.org/2013/02/16/ddp-31st-annual-meeting-dates-and-location-set/
Ad Astra Rocket Factory, Professional Tour ($50/person) on Monday, July 15. 8:15am to 11:30am. Limit is 25 persons, so reserve early! See the VASIMR plasma rocket engine, advanced superconductors, one of the world’s largest vacuum test chambers, and animations of future space exploration missions. You need not be a U.S. citizen, but the company needs to know your name and citizenship in advance. We will depart hotel at 8:15am and will be back at the hotel no later than 11:30am.
– Anthony
The first time I have ever been able to stay watching a whole video of such length. It was an excellent presentation and held the attention throughout.
Have you ever produced a paper version? I would like to send it to several friends who prefer to read rather than to watch.
Is there any chance of getting some company or institution to fund multiple copies (subject to your copyright) so that it can be sent to schools for use in their science classes?
Apologies for fat finger spelling on previous post.
Solomon Green says:
August 20, 2013 at 4:44 am
> The first time I have ever been able to stay watching a whole video of such length. It was an excellent presentation and held the attention throughout.
This is probably the most important critique. No matter how good the content is, if people won’t listen to it, it wouldn’t matter.
Excellent presentation Anthony. We haven’t had any of our more alarmist friends making comments so I guess they are having difficulty coming up with any arguments against you.
The NOAA approach to dealing with these documented temperature station problems is insulting to the public and scientific community. Closing the bad stations without admitting the problems for the temperature records or public debate is irresponsible. They are in effect hiding their “we’ve always done it this way” management style.
[Snip. Read the Policy page. Some pejoratives are unwelcome here. — mod.]
I think the relevance of you keeping this going at the top is significant. It acts like a mission statement of who you are and what you believe in.
It quickly allows those accessing this site to know you……..a likeable and genuine guy with good communication skills. The broadcasting experience helped developed those skills but being genuine is natural
Getting to know you also included some personal items about Anthony Watts that are compelling about his desire to be authentic and do whats best for mankind…………….especially relevant in a political battle between 2 sides that often resort to personal attacks on the sincerely and agenda driven motives of the other side.
Excellent stuff. The docs should have a much more realistic view of things now than *some* people would have them believe. Also, fascinating to hear old Franklin did the snow on soot experiment so long ago.
You should start a “video presentations” section up there with the Reference Pages, Resources etc. This one deserves to remain easily found.
Solid presentation. The most important thing is that you come across as a reasonable person with humor, humility, and a great deal of knowledge on the subject matter that has arrived at a position through much deliberation and investigation; not some zealot on a mission, paid for crony, or arrogant know-it-all that has taken a position due to self-interest, bandwagon syndrome, or a predisposing to jumping to conclusions if they fit a particular world view.
What gets me is the lack of commentary from those with a higher visibility ,that agree with Anthony.
This is a very good presentation.
I think the global warmers are much more united, then the global coolers.
That is a great presentation. The package of information is neat and flows seamlessly. The comparison to listening to videos from some of those ‘climate scientists’ and you, is night and day. Very nice focus!
You forgot to add in several hundred ‘um, uhh, and err’s, though. Not a one in your entire talk, unlike some other speakers.
Good presentation, Anthony. Of course you have done this professionally for many years, but I think the content and the order of the presentation were effective. I wish you would have included some graphical information on extreme weather, and your explanation of how that fits in with climate change.
Bravo, Anthony!
That was a great presentation! And now, possibly unbeknownst to you, you have opened up an entirely new way of reaching out to people.
Visual and/or verbal presentations on WUWT.
Let’s have you and other renowned contributors appearing in person giving their points of view.
I’m sure that, even if the presenters do not wish to appear in person, that their ‘radio’ presentations would be most acceptable. I, for one, would love to hear the tales previously only written, given vocally by Willis (if he is too shy to appear!)
The spoken word is far more powerful than the written word when making scientific points to the general public. You have the talent of being able to speak TO people and not DOWN to them; you don’t lecture, you educate.
Please, please give us more like this.
Quality, Mr Watts, quality.