Potential Phoenix Climate Presentation

I am considering making a climate presentation in Phoenix based on my book, videos, and blogging on how catastrophic anthropogenic global warming theory tends to grossly overestimate man’s negative impact on climate.

I need an honest answer – is there any interest out there in the Phoenix area in that you might attend such a presentation in North Phoenix followed by a Q&A?  Email me or leave notes in the comments.  If you are associated with a group that might like to attend such a presentation, please email me.

  • Tiffany

    No, because your an idiot with unfounded beliefs.

  • stan

    Tiffany,

    The proper way to spell the contraction of “you are” is “you’re”, not “your”. Of course, your unfounded beliefs may differ.

  • Fred from Canuckistan . . .

    Imagine what Tiffany would do to arithmetic, or science.

  • olsthro

    Tiffany,
    What founded beliefs do you subscribe to?
    Please enlighten us…

  • GregS

    Why not film the presentation and post the recording to Youtube? I would be delighted to watch.

  • stan

    Warren,

    You ought to tell Tom Fuller about any presentation you end up doing. I think he might cover it from his unique perspective as an avowed politically left-wing, but AGW agnostic/mild skeptic journalist.

  • hunter

    If you want to make a tit of yourself in public, then you should do a talk, yeah.

  • Matt

    Tiffany,
    he is a skeptic, an unbeliever, that is what this site is all about!

    So often it is those who espouse the theories of Anthropogenic Global Warming that “believe” because a scientist has told them, without actually either properly understanding the science or making their own enquiries.

    Personally I would call myself a sceptical agnostic. I can see where they are coming from but have yet to be convinced. What really annoys me about the AGW proponents is that they are so sure they are right, despite very little actual empirical evidence. Lots of computer climate models, but no actual changes on the ground that could not be explained by other more mundane factors.

    I think it is a good idea, for all sorts of other reasons, to reduce our dependence on burning fossil fuels. But I despise being preached to and patronised by people with no firmer grasp of reality than the average Mooney.

    A classic example was a piece I read yesterday by some group that said Daffodils will flower in the UK in December (as opposed to March at the moment) “if global warming causes temperatures to rise as predicted by 6 degrees centigrade by 2080”.

    Predicted by who? On what assumptions? Why would the temperature rise 6 degrees in 70 years when it has barely risen half a degree in the last century?

    For the opposing views I tend to read this blog and Real-Climate which, despite its rather patronising tone at times, is at least written by real scientists who actually understand what they are talking about. It is a pity they appear too afraid to question some of the more ludicrous and extreme proponents of the “belief” that their rather interesting theory has turned into.

    Sorry, that quick post turned into a rant. I’ll get my coat…

  • Matt

    Sorry that should be “barely risen 0.9 degrees in the last century” (source Hadcrut3v temperature series – Hadley Climate Research Unit at University of East Anglia, UK).

  • David Y

    Go for it. It’s interesting (and encouraging) to watch some of the vids of Chris Horner talking w/larger groups in person about this issue. The live forum seems an excellent place to test, refine and ‘open up’ the discussion–and given how much the AGW issue is enmeshed with the loss of personal freedoms in the US, it could be a great forum to ‘renew’ interest of Libertarian ideals. Please post if you end up doing this here in Sacramento–or want someone else to test it out here in the greater “Statist” metro area, where the local paper (SacBee) recently started a campaign of asking neighbors to rat on neighbors who are ‘wasting’ water–including sending a picture and address to the paper for posting. Never mind that this campaign violated multiple principles of conduct of the American Society of New Editors and the A.P.

  • Graphite

    Tiffany and hunter – I would have thought this would be the ideal opportunity to go and impress all the sceptics with your vast and superior science knowledge and huge intellect face to face. Make them eat humble pie, convert them to true believers in man-made global warming… and then you will feel much better!

    LOL 😀

  • ADiff

    we’d certainly have to attend that!

  • Steve

    I would love to try and attend however I get an error message when I click on the contact button. If you would post the date and time I will try to get there or if you have access to my email address that I entered in order to post this I will respond with my interests as well as other possibly interested people and or groups.

  • Andrew

    Warren-Well, I don’t live anywhere near Phoenix, but I wish you good luck.

  • hunter- the sane one

    dollars for donuts that ‘Tiffany’ and ‘hunter’ are the same troll.

  • Pogo

    @hunter: “If you want to make a tit of yourself in public, then you should do a talk, yeah.”

    Well… I suppose that it’s more adventurous than you, who only makes a tit of him/herself in semi-private.

  • Not near Phoenix, like the you tube idea, would suggest vimeo as a higher video quality is available, and if the uploaded video is good, the quality is breathtaking.

    An aside, what is the status of the Methane Hydrate “flammable ice” issue? I saw that recent methane out-gassing (?) from Siberia and Arctic Sea was observed, and I saw a piece over the weekend that methane hydrate may have caused the most recent extinction. If AGW advocates have a persuasive argument, this is it.

  • Gordon

    Would like to attend your conference but I need a when and where. If not possible would like to see on u-tube. Quick thought to Mr Willcox. I listened to an excellent presentation on warming vs methane hydrate release a couple of years ago and there is good evidence that it strongly affects global temperature, however this is definately not good news for the priests of AGW. This has happened in the past and is one of the many naturally occuring processes that affect climate. It is not a result of fossil fuel release of CO2 into the atmosphere.