This will be a top sticky post for a day or two, new articles will appear below this one.
UPDATE: podcasts are now available, see links below.
Readers may recall that back in May, I helped with obtaining funding for the 50 to 1 project out of Australia. During the summer, the project organizers made good on their promises to interview a number of people on the skeptical side of climate science, yours truly included. There’s also the main video which sums up the state of climate science and politics in just under 10 minutes.
My video interview is presented mostly as it happened, with only some very light editing done to the one on one interview in my office, and it runs almost an hour and covers several topics. The main theme video, hosted by Topher Field, who is the producer, is also available below:
The main video:
The 50 to 1 website: http://topher.com.au/50-to-1-video-project/
It also has the data and calculations (in a PDF) for support of the video, along with full length interviews from other contributors.
UPDATE: Reader Mark aka “Jabba The Cat” has converted audio from the videos into podcasts for listening to while driving or other activities. He writes:
These links are to the mp3 audio files, at Tubescoop, that I stripped out from the Topher interview videos on Youtube so that WUWT readers can load them into their iPhones, Android devices and music players.
Anthony Watts
Fred Singer
Joanne Nova
Donna Laframboise
David Evans
Henry Ergas
Christopher Essex
Marc Morano
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Bryan S says:
September 2, 2013 at 12:02 am
Well said Bryan and welcome on board the reality express. In the end this not about politics but what is a rational approach to the environment and the needs of our fellow man.
Look forward to watching the interviews, but I wish Mr. Topher had refrained from using the weasel term “climate change.” It’s all about hypothetical Global Warming, and that’s the petard the Climatists should be hanged upon.
/Mr Lynn
Nice work. I’m happy to say I contributed.
Anthony, great interview, I concur with your outlook on Thorium. I recently finished a ‘team’ class paper on Thorium reactors. There were a couple of things that stood out, Other than, Natural Gas w/ CCS, nuclear technology is comparable on a capital costs basis against all other forms of energy production. Once you factor in efficiency, nuclear 90%, wind 37%, and solar 25% (EIA.gov), nuclear becomes by far the better alternative and cheaper than solar and about 20% more expensive than wind (onshore).
So how do we get past the stigma of 3 horrible disasters in nuclear history, 3-Mile Island, Chernobyl, and of course recently Fukishima. This I do not know, it will be an up hill battle. Thorium with slightly lower fission temperatures and a fail safe reactor plug, should be an easy sell yet that will probably not be the case. We all know that there are people that oppose any forward motion on technology.
It baffles me when I see people support the idea that, making energy more expensive is the way to fight climate change, whether that change is real or imagined (computerized). This is not my idea, but an America with cheap, abundant, and clean energy is in a by far better position to innovate ideas to combat any possible future change.
I truly hope more people begin to read and understand what you and many others are trying to say. If Obama gets his way and our energy infrastructure takes the hit that is planned over the next decade, the future outlook is grim. Energy has been a driving force in Americas Economic supremacy over the past century and with us already falling behind crippling our ability to produce energy is not the answer.
I say this often but thank you for what you do, at some point people will wake up and blogs like this will be there only hope for the truth. As we saw in January with the publishing of V4 HADCRUT, there is obviously going to be a push to remove any evidence of cooling from 1940 – 1975 and currently, in a matter of 1 month, Dec 12 till Jan 13, CRU’s warmest month went from 1998 to 2010, despicable!
Calm, rational, thoughtful, and exposing the underbelly of the CAGW beast. Meanwhile, the climate liars have been ramping up the lies and rhetoric, like at the recent climate conference in Majuro; http://news.yahoo.com/climate-science-alarming-irrefutable-kerry-093106799.html
Rabid climate liar and Obama puppet Kerry bloviates about it;
The biggest problem is that while we have true science and rationality on our side, they have a belief system which circumvents rational thought, logic, and facts. Believers simply want to believe. It’s part of their whole identity.
Great interview, looking forward to seeing the rest.
Thank you for posting the links.
Bryan S says:
September 2, 2013 at 12:02 am
“Anthony Watts–…………………… I detest the way climate change alarmism has detracted from the environmental issues that really matter (deforestation of tropical forests, bad forest management here in the U.S. that has destroyed our once pristine landscape, etc).”
Bryan, please read “1491” and “1493” by Charles Mann, we’re late to the game, for outside of the Northern Prairies for much of the Americas particularly Amazonia there are no “pristine landscapes”
Bryan continues: “………. The truth is: Humanity is becoming more peaceful, people are being lifted out of poverty by the wonderous energy output of fossil fuels, and our future, even if slightly warmer, looks bright if you just sift through the claptrap.”
Bryan, very good, also read “Constant Battles: The Myth of the Peaceful Noble Savage” by Steven Le Blanc to find out what pre-Colonial savagery was.
Bryan continues: “…..I will continue to encourage other people in my age group to care about the issue of climate change and to find the truth.”
Bryan, Thank You.
Great. I thought your interview was very balanced and informative.
The 50:1 website is really good.
The problem is, how do we get this to go “viral”?
fantastic contribution to the video series anthony.i have also watched jo nova and david evans contributions.such clear and concise rebuttal based on the observations is impossible for the warmists to realistically dispute.
day by day now it seems the cause is being greatly discredited,it cannot be long before some enterprising politicians see the light and get on the bandwagon in the uk.
I believe one of the key phrases is that we should stop being afraid and start thinking. Most of the young people I encounter who have been raised on climate disaster since the days of their Weekly Reader, are terrified.
I thought the whole thing was very well done EXCEPT for the cartoons. Whilst the figures used within them were good, the cartoons smacked of a much younger age group than the content presented by the interviewees.
Who is this actually aimed at?
I’ve now seen Anthony do several video presentations and there is no doubt that he comes over well, no doubt due to his tv training.
tonyb
“Stop being afraid, and start thinking”
Well, I suppose the average person may be able to do that,
but whether someone enamored by CAGW by CO2 can do either
is very much in doubt based on their activities so far.
Overall, good presentation of the 50:1 concept.
Glad I was able to help, albeit in a very small way.
Let’s see:
If we code the responses inappropriately, subtract them from “average normal responses”, take those anomilies, smooth them, average them, decyclicize them, do some non-linear curve fitting and then incorrectly infer cause and effect where no mechanism is known or can be supported by data of any kind we will have what I call Standard Normal Climate Science Results. Don’t laugh yet, as there are many of our own climate skeptics who publish regularly on this site who are guilty of these offenses as well as those crazed warmists we deride.
Anthony!!! Sticky Post!!!
Thanks Anthony, enjoyed it greatly!
Thanks, Anthony. Good deed. What a roster of scientists and thinkers!
Absent unremitting focus on the profoundly anti-scientific political-economic motivations of AGW Catastrophists’ Goebelian claptrap, all objective, rational discourse must ultimately prove futile.
“J’Accuse!” may seem uncivil, but the alternative is Devil’s Island.
Great presentation so far – I’m about half way through. Money well spent!
But on feedbacks, according to the mechanism presumed by “mainstream” Climate Science, I still have no idea why water vapor didn’t already do completely by itself what the “mainstream” Climate Scientists say it will do to assist CO2. It makes absolutely no sense to me that water vapor would need any CO2 at all to do the same thing Climate Scientists say it will do when ‘activated ‘by CO2. Or at the least, why would water vapor not become already activated by a much smaller CO2 concentration? It sounds like Climate Science says both that water vapor is and is not a ghg……………
.@Bryan S
“I don’t mean to toot my own horn (oh heck, yes I do)… but I’m a liberal late 20s Obamaniac who despises the GOP and almost everything they represent.”
Obama’s National Energy Care System will easily give the Great Central Government the full Totalitarian control he and “they” desire. I am a “Classical” Liberal.
Oops, forgot to thank Topher, too.
Thanks, Topher!
Well done. I am proud to be one of the 690!
I’m halfway through your interview. It is good, but your presentation at Doctors for Disaster Preparedness (DDP) was far better job in communication. The Doctors presentation ia a finely choreographed mix of audio and effective visuals of charts and photographs. The same DDP graphics should be intercut into this video as a version 2.0 edit if the interview is to have any life on the internet.
Please put a link to the DDP presentation on your “About Me” page and give visitors a chance to stumble upon it. Better yet, make the DDP video top line item on a “Watts Best” Index menu.
I know they had to use the IPCC numbers but using the Stern report with its near 0 discount rate makes this 50:1 calculation very low and still it is compelling. For a good discussion of this see Vaclav Klaus’ book “Blue Planet in Green Shacles”
Thanks Anthony very informative. The global weather station expose’ was excellent..
I’ve had carbon dioxide burn out for several years now. So, thanks for the synopsis there too, as I have been just sorta sweeping it way back somewhere in the brain. The thought of ‘carbon credits’ makes me ill.
There’s probably a dust factor they have forgotten to factor as well.
Mankind does have many impacts on the planet, at our rates of usage and population, like Alan Greenspan once or twice or three or more times said, ” It is not sustainable.”
What strikes me so vividly about video interviews of skeptics versus ‘believers’ is the contrast in demeanour. Anthony, you appear serene and calm, as do others like Tim Ball and Roy Spencer. The antagonistic, indignant, raised-eyebrow expressions on Mike Mann or Peter Glieck bely an inner conflict, as do the hand-wiinging of McKibben and the unconvincing prattle of pols like Kerry & Obama. It really challenges my self control to sit quietly and watch the latter.