The 2016 AGU Fall Meeting is coming up in December. With nearly 24,000 attendees, AGU Fall Meeting is the largest Earth and space science meeting in the world. I hope to attend so that I can cover what is being presented in the world of climate science, while keeping tabs on the antics of people like Michael Mann, John Cook, Peter Gleick, and some of the other players. As some people may or may not know, I am a full member of the American Geophysical Union (AGU) in good standing. For the last three years when I attended, I produced several reports and videos in 2013, 2014,and 2015 plus many, many, live Twitter entries that kept tabs on the politics and the science. This year I hope to do the same. But this year, I’m going to be more than that – Willis and I will be the only climate skeptics invited to give a scientific presentation.
Last year, my presentation was well received, and even made the AGU press release feed. You can view it here.
The presentation this year came right out of the pages of WUWT, inspired by these two blog posts.
Precipitable Water and Precipitable Water Redux I expect it will be contentious to some.
It will be at AGU on Wednesday, Dec14th.
Abstract ID: 190899
Final Paper Number: A33B-0226
Abstract Title: Observational Quantification of Water Vapor Radiation Forcing
Session Date and Time: Wednesday, December 14th; 1:40 PM – 6:00 PM
Presentation Length: 19:10 – 19:25
Session Number and Title: A33B: Climate Sensitivity and Feedbacks: Advances and New Paradigms I Posters
Observational Quantification of Water Vapor Radiation Forcing
Authors
Anthony W. Watts, Willis Eschenbach
Abstract:
An investigation was conducted utilizing the Remote Sensing Systems (RSS) 1°x1° gridded total precipitable water (TPW) dataset to determine the magnitude of upwelling long-wave infrared radiation from Earth’s surface since 1988. TPW represents the mass of water vapor in a 1 meter by 1 meter column from the surface to the top of the atmosphere. As referenced in IPCC AR5 WGI Box 8.1, the radiative effect of absorption by water vapor is roughly proportional to the logarithm of its concentration. Therefore it is the fractional change in water vapor concentration, not the absolute change, that governs its strength as a climate forcing mechanism. A time-series analysis utilizing a Loess decomposition filter indicated there is a clear upward trend in the RSS TPW data since 1988. The observed total change over the period is ~ 1.5 kg/m^2, centered around the long-term mean of 28.7 kg/m^2. Utilizing the observed relationship between water content and atmospheric absorption, the RSS TPW data indicates an increase in downwelling longwave radiation of 3.3 W/m2 over the period 1988 – 2015.
As in years past, here’s the problem. It is VERY expensive to attend, and more so in previous years due to my dual role as news media as well as presenting AGU member. The reason is that I’m told that while in previous years I could register for free as a member of the news media, this year (and last year) due to the fact that I’m presenting, I’m also required to register like any other attending member. I also have to register Willis.
The cost of registration is $480, and the deadline is November 3rd at 1159PM EDT to get that rate. That’s TONIGHT.
Add a hotel for 5-6 days at the typical $150-250 per night rate in SFO, plus incidentals, printing/publication costs, parking, etc. and the cost to attend easily tops $3000.
While many attendees get the taxpayers (via their Universities) or their NGO’s via donors to pay for such things, WUWT has no such resources, and despite the claims common from detractors, like the last few years, we are still waiting for that “big oil check” to arrive. I’ll drive down to save money rather than take a plane. Willis will drive (and maybe take BART) too.
So, like I have done before (and many of you graciously responded), I thought I’d ask the readership if they can help out so that there will be somebody at AGU to report on climate science that can do so from the skeptic side. It is very important that at least one climate skeptic reporter attend. Otherwise, the media coverage will be completely one-sided. As they have before, AGU approved my media pass for 2016, so now I’m set to attend for that at least, but in order to present, I need to pay the member registration fee (for myself and for Willis) and hotel in advance.
Due to the fact that water vapor seems to be generally ignored in favor of CO2 as a climate driver, I suspect this presentation won’t be all that well received, and may raise some eyebrows. If we are lucky, some people might actually leave their comfort zone and pay attention.
Willis and I need your help to get it done.. Thanks for your consideration, and most of all thanks for reading WUWT.
Donations toward this effort will be gratefully accepted: here
See update below.
P.S. This year, with all the activists trying to get AGU to boot out the oil and gas sponsors – unsuccessfully, one wonders if we will see this poster on display again:
“Dear George, remember no man is a failure who has friends. Thanks for the wings. Love, Clarence.”
Done. Get ‘er done.
Done, Thanks for all that you do Anthony.
Done. Thanks so much for all your efforts, Anthony and you too, Willis.
$50 on the way for you guys!
Think I just donated for a talk about clouds
donation in ..good luck to both of you …hope its not too late!
Small donation made – hope it helps Anthony.
Modest contribution from a senior citizen. Good luck with the presentation.
Donated for you and Willis — looking forward to those conference reports!
Done.
Done have fun. Don’t come back with a black eye.
Also did a small donation. Thanks for the awesome work.
I don’t mean to throw a wet blanket on things, but wouldn’t this just show water vapor to be a strong positive feedback?
Yeah I sent a donation too.
????
That’s my first name, I go by my middle name Anthony. Thanks very much.
Sorry for the bother. I’m way beyond paranoid and worry about anything that looks even slightly wrong. 🙂
Ray Pierrehumbert and others have given “Invited” talks. In contrast, your request to present was accepted. There is a big difference.
Pierrehumbert’s 2012 talk was full of NON-science, half-truths, and errors like this one:
… the models were getting it right, and it was the CLIMAP data and Lindzen’s theories that were wrong. Unfortunately, bad scientists don’t acknowledge their mistakes; Lindzen keeps inventing ever more arcane theories to avoid admitting he was wrong.
(Source: http://www.easterbrook.ca/steve/2012/12/successful-predictions-agu-2012-tyndall-lecture/ )
IOW
You have, on the one hand:
P., a junk science climate clown, invited by the AGU because the AGU (to keep the gov’t. grant money flowing) backs the junk science of failed-model-based AGW.
And on the other:
Anthony Watts, et al., presenter of observational-based, historically accurate, science.
There is a big difference.
“Ray Pierrehumbert and others have given “Invited” talks”
Was the comedy festival in town again !!
Donated 50 buck. Keep up the good work.
A little help…
Knock em dead.
In order to reduce the meeting’s carbon footprint, rather than hold the meeting in San Francisco they should hold the meeting on line on the Internet.
Gee, maybe they realize that the carbon (carbon dioxide) footprint. doesn’t have much to do with the climate – hurricanes, drought, rainfall floods, tornadoes, sea level rise… etc.
@ur momisugly willhaas, That’s logical, don’t you know ?
Anthony and Willis, it is a privilege to be able to donate to your trip.
I’m in too. A modest contribution from another senior citizen – but as much as I can afford. Oh to be a rich man… and make a REAL difference.
Good luck to both of you and my thanks and appreciation for all the hard work you do to promote truth.
Donated $20 from New Zealand.
Done!
If you need more Anthony just let us know.
You and Willis have a drink on me.
James Bull
OK. Done. Anytime, just ask.