Watch AGU meetings on live stream

The Fall AGU meeting has started

Live Streams and Videos On-Demand: Watch live streaming and recorded Fall Meeting sessions. Nearly 100 sessions (almost 600 presentations in total) will be available live and on demand. Details follow.


Register and begin viewing now. Be sure to use code AGU13 for free access!


Schedule is here:


See the program for a list of everything.

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
December 9, 2013 9:39 am

You know, I was going to do this, and then I realized that I could spend the time hitting myself in the head with a hammer, and it would be more fun.

December 9, 2013 10:09 am
December 9, 2013 10:13 am

A lot of sessions on upper atmoshpere aerosols and their effect on climate change, sounds interesting.

December 9, 2013 10:23 am

Thanks Anthony you saved me $100 🙂
There goes my free time this week {✖¿✖}

Frank K.
December 9, 2013 10:24 am

So why don’t they ever have these meetings in more “rustic” venues – like, Bismarck, ND (current temperature -1 F)? Or maybe Cleveland?

December 9, 2013 10:28 am

I’ve just read, The NSIDC plans to make new all-time record low of -91.2°C in Antarctica public at the coming AGU meeting.
“American researchers from the US National Snow and Ice Data Centre (NSIDC) prepare to make public satellite temperature measurements data which maintains that a record temperature of -91.2°C was registered in Antarctica on August 3, 2004, near the Japanese Dome Fuji station, situated on the Valkyrie Dome in the heart of the White Continent.”

Bruce Cobb
December 9, 2013 10:29 am

“Climate change is already here and having effects.”
Wow, who knew? The climate changes, and those changes have effects. My eyes have been opened. Be still, my beating heart.
“At this workshop, participants of all experience levels will learn how to communicate climate science basics to general audiences, especially during media interviews, including showing how their specific research connects to the climate science consensus.”
Yes indeed; learning how to spew climate propaganda is important. No need for actual facts or science, just say the magic word “consensus”, and bingo, you’re home free.
“Event Title:Communicating Climate Science in an IPCC Year
Event Notes: Scientists can do a lot more to convey basic, broad certainties about climate science that many people don’t realize or might not accept—for instance, that climate change is already here and having effects. This year, in particular, several global and national assessment reports, including the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change’s 5th Assessment Report and the U.S. National Climate Assessment, are being released that will create opportunities for scientists to talk about climate science with the public. At this workshop, participants of all experience levels will learn how to communicate climate science basics to general audiences, especially during media interviews, including showing how their specific research connects to the climate science consensus. Speakers include John Cook, a Climate Communication Research Fellow for the Global Change Institute at the University of Queensland, Aaron Huertas, a Press Secretary at the Union of Concerned Scientists, and Susanne Moser Director and Principal Researcher of Susanne Moser Research Consulting and a Social Science Research Fellow at Stanford University’s Woods Institute for the Environment.”
Oh, and here’s a good one on “ethics”. I wonder if Gleick is leading it?
“Event Title:Ethics Workshop
Event Notes: Social action based on the results of scientific exploration and reporting reflects a broader public trust that membership conduct themselves according to the highest ethical standard in professional activities, scientific research, communications, and public engagement. AGU invites all members to participate in a discussion about preserving scientific integrity and the responsibility of each member to uphold the standards of scientific conduct.”

December 9, 2013 10:32 am

CONTROL ID: 1816925
TITLE: A New Observational Temperature Dataset for the United States 1850 to Present
AUTHORS (FIRST NAME, LAST NAME): Zeke Hausfather1, Steven Mosher1, Robert A Rohde1
INSTITUTIONS (ALL): 1. Berkeley Earth, Berkeley, CA, United States.
ABSTRACT BODY: High resolution climate datasets are needed for the study of local climate changes and the evaluation of regional climate models. Unfortunately, the lack of homogeneity considerations in many modern climate datasets, such as PRISM, can make some datasets unsuitable for the study of long-term climate trends. Here we present a new data product that applies the Berkeley Earth averaging methodology to data from approximately 20,000 North American weather stations in order to produce homogeneous quarter-degree gridded monthly temperature fields for the Contiguous United States (CONUS) spanning the period 1850 to present. These fields are optimized for the study of long-term climatic trends while accounting for spurious local biases due to station moves, instrument changes, and other effects that are often present in raw weather station data. We compare the new Berkeley CONUS dataset to the PRISM temperature dataset, and note that the Berkeley Earth process allows many spurious trend artifacts to be avoided. In addition, we also compare and contrast both of these ground-based observational data products with temperature fields derived from MSU satellite data and the results of NCEP climate model reanalyses. The advantages and shortcomings of each methodology for accurately representing spatial variability and changes in both monthly anomalies and longer-term trends will be discussed.
KEYWORDS: 1694 GLOBAL CHANGE Instruments and techniques, 1926 INFORMATICS Geospatial, 1980 INFORMATICS Spatial analysis and representation, 9350 GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION North America.
(No Table Selected)
Additional Details
Previously Presented Material: The new dataset was not previously published or presented, though the approach builds off a homogenization and spatial reconstruction (kriging) method perviously published.

December 9, 2013 10:56 am

Paul says December 9, 2013 at 10:09 am
Will someone tell these guys to get with the programme:

Winters, what about the winters BI?
5th day in a row (Thu-Mon) with ice on the ground and roadways in Texas and temps are STILL not going to get out of the thirties! No sunlight/sunshine through a persistent cloud deck either!
The low will be twenty something again tonight! Could give a flip about the summers at present!!!!

December 9, 2013 10:59 am

@ Mr Mosher,
Your penultimate word,
” … perviously published.”,
might be in need of correction.

December 9, 2013 11:20 am

Steven Mosher says:
December 9, 2013 at 10:32 am
Congrats to Steven and Zeke.

Ted Swart
December 9, 2013 11:20 am

There is such a thing as culpable ignorance. The AGU, the Royal Society, the AAAS and many other supposedly renowned scientific organizations are indeed culpably ignorant when it comes to the magnitude of extra CO2’s effect on the Earth’s climate. Putting it plainly: They ought to know better.
They have simply closed their eyes and not done their homework.
When the history of the durability of the exagerrated AGW meme comes to be written and blame comes to be apportioned they will have to admit to owning a large part of the blame, Journalists and governments can to some extent be excused but trained scientists can not. Their publicly displayed ignorance is quite simply inexcusable.

Rhoda R
December 9, 2013 11:23 am

There is sort of a ‘Daniel in the lion’s den’ aspect to this.
REPLY: yes I feel this very same way, being here at the AGU convention. The sneering is palpable. – Anthony

Steve McIntyre
December 9, 2013 11:44 am

has anyone successfully navigated the AGU session to watch a live-streaming session? I registered and tried, but have thus far been unsuccessfully in finding the right location to watch a session.

Bryan A
December 9, 2013 12:19 pm

SFO was reportedly only 34F this morning. Even with the marine influence… Must be the Gore effect

December 9, 2013 12:19 pm

Steve, How much would you like to bet you’ve been blackballed from any participation in this event?

December 9, 2013 12:23 pm

Steve, start here and log in, then the next page at the top it has live channel options and on demand etc.
Regards Ed

Mike Maguire
December 9, 2013 12:35 pm

Will someone tell these guys to get with the programme:
Nice theory that makes meteorological sense. However, after experiencing all that melting ice, the reality is that we went a record number of years (24) WITHOUT a widespread severe drought in the US Cornbelt (1988-2012). The real world ALWAYS trumps theories/models.
There are other factors that have been more important. My personal favorite that is not being captured properly are the huge gains from evapotranspiration during the growing season.
1. Corn plant populations are almost double what they were 30 years ago. This has led to dew points in many cases of 5+ degrees higher from transpiration alone.
2. Irrigation from underground water has greatly increased. This adds moisture to the plants and also the soil.
3. Though corn is a C4 plant and doesn’t benefit as much as most plants(C4) from increasing CO2, the majority of plants and other crops are C4 and root mass benefits the most. This allows plants to capture much more nutrients including ground moisture. This added moisture causes a significant increase in plant transpiration which translates to higher amount of low level moisture in the atmosphere.
“Studies have revealed that about 10 percent of the moisture found in the atmosphere is released by plants through transpiration”
So the increase in CO2 through this mechanism and human influence from growing denser crops like corn and irrigating those crops is DECREASING the chance of scorching and droughty Summers in the US. Humans have created a “micro climate” in the Midwest/Cornbelt during the growing season that has shifted growing conditions to slightly more favorable than they were.
If I had the resources, time,connections and grant money, I would love to do a legit study, as this is a huge blind spot. Even those looking objectively, using authentic science are not giving it enough weight.

December 9, 2013 12:44 pm

@ daver says:
December 9, 2013 at 10:59 am
Perviously is not a word commonly encountered, but might have been intentionally used by Mosh. Either way, it’s hilarious.

December 9, 2013 1:34 pm

Looking through the schedule, I found this:

8:00 AM ‐ 8:15 AM  ED21B‐01. How Not To Be A Buzzkill: Creative Techniques In Using Humor To 
Combat Doomsday Narratives (Invited) 
    Laurel Whitney, Pace University New York, DeSmogBlog

That’s got to be some kind of mistake! The bloggers at DeSmogBlog have got to be the most humorless doom mongers I have ever seen.. Well, on second thought, they’re not as bad as Climate Progress.

Mark Bofill
December 9, 2013 2:14 pm

Congrats Steven Mosher.

December 9, 2013 2:33 pm

Paul says:
December 9, 2013 at 10:09 am
Here is the same article at Newsvine. I have been commenting on it.

François GM
December 9, 2013 5:51 pm

@Stephen Mosher. In my field, medicine, abstracts without results are systematically refused. Good for you that your field is different. Too bad for us. Nevertheless, I wonder about your term “high resolution”. A definition would be appreciated. As a corollary, should a high resolution methodology be able to detect the UHI effect over time ? If so, how does the methodology in question in your abstract – I presume BEST – fare ?

December 11, 2013 7:44 pm

Having alittle problem with the video page loading at the AGU virtual options site. Watched a view Voyagers talks.
Then found this..
404 videos uploaded..
FM13 The Weak Solar Cycle and Its Consequences

And Dr. S., you seem a bit nervous..

December 11, 2013 7:48 pm

Click on playlist and look for your video..

Verified by MonsterInsights