The coming denier festival: Watts, Nova headline national tour

Get ready for a fresh storm of misinformation hitting our shores down under! After Christopher “Lord” Monckton’s tour this year, another luminary of the denial movement is coming to Australia for a speaking tour. 

Anthony Watt’s the world’s “leading sceptical climate blogger, is touring down under:

Anthony Watts is a TV weatherman, meterologist and has arguably the worlds best blog site on the climate change debate.

He has been researching the global surface temperatures from around the world and will be speaking in 18 cities across Australia. The conclusions are highly significant to the international debate. This tour will have three or four high quality presentations at each meeting. We hope many of you will attend and brings some friends as well.

The Emissions Trading Scheme is still government policy and these presentations will make you think hard about the gap between the facts, public perception and where our political leaders want to take us

Dates are listed here.

If I’m free, I’m planning to go and report.

Expect a fresh round of misinformation reported in The Australian, on Nova’s blog, Andrew Bolt’s blog and in newspapers.

Question: how can we challenge the distortions and misinformation that is bound to hit the media?

12 thoughts on “The coming denier festival: Watts, Nova headline national tour

  1. Sou says:

    I wonder will he take questions or will he restrict himself to planted questions? It wouldn’t be hard to pose a few eg showing up Goddards crazy posts, how he explains the hottest year this year, how his thermometers are going, whatever happened to his planned ‘peer reviewed’ publication, has he figured out yet what a temperature anomaly is, what are his preferred colours for global temperature charts – lol.

    It would be nice to get Kerry O’Brien to do to Watts what he did to Rudd and Abbott recently, except that Watts is such a third rate player that he hopefully wouldn’t rate a showing on the 7.30 report. (Hopefully he won’t rate a showing in the media at all, but if he does, let’s hope the journalist does their homework first.)

  2. That’s anything but good news…. I was hoping that as I scrolled down the list I wouldn’t see adelaide in the list – avoiding us not unlike many bands – but there is was. They’ll have fun in Mt Gambier, from experience they’re don’t seem at all concerned.
    It gets to me how such people get away with such blatant propaganda that threatens every aspect of our lives as well as every remaining ecosystem. It gets to me more when I’m trying to work with people and they write off my work based on the rubbish they hear from people like these… I wouldn’t be surprised if, like tobacco and more recently this ridiculous climategate, it’ll be hard to hold anyone of them accountable for the damage their actions cause.

  3. J Bowers says:

    Sou said: “I wonder will he take questions or will he restrict himself to planted questions?”

    That in itself would be a question worth asking.😉

    How historians will write about some of these people just doesn’t seem to enter their minds.

  4. I reckon they’re so consumed with their ideology that they probably think historians will consider them heroes.
    That said, they demonstrate a lack of concern over future generations power concerns and agricultural adaptability, so I guess they don’t care at all of what the future thinks of them; as long as they ride their cash cow in comfort to their grave, the future can go to hell.
    It’s very much the same short term thinking a great many politicians and economists are able to employ…:-/

    • Watching the Deniers says:

      I suspect your right, however I also think it is a case of “true believer syndrome”. They believe they possess the special knowledge, and a greater insight into how the world works than scientists and anyone else. I’ve heard many a climate sceptic/denier say “History will justify us!”.

      • Mekhong Kurt says:

        @WtD, I’ve always found it interesting that deniers (1.) accuse those who believe there’s something to AGW are guilty of being uncritically, religiously, devout to “The Cause” of AGW, when, (2.) such is *precisely the trait evidenced in their own words, especially when they say stuff like :the science isn’t settled for many scientists” or “reputable sicentists dispute the theory” when in fact nearly *all* climate scientists agree there’s something to the notion and their nso-called “reputable scientists” turn out to be hacks for outfits such as the Heartland Institute, various industry associations and companies (same as with the “debate” over tobacco and it’s health effects) or aren’t qualified, in many cases, as we saw with the signers of the infamous Oregon Petition.

        In the first instance, though I’m not a psychologist or psychiatrist, I suspect a person in one of those professions might conclude, given a chance to interview a significant number of the deniers, that they were projecting their *own* traits outward to others, especially their opponent (like you and me). In the second instance, they’re paid/volunteer hacks, willfully ignorant, stupid, or lying — I don’t know which om any given case.

        BTW — your website is most excellent. Thanks for running it. I first came to it thanks to Andrew Revkin, whom I also admire and follow.

      • Moth says:

        Mekhong:
        That’s the thing about any agenda or idea that must prevail regardless – they need ways to overcome hypocrisy. I’ve documented comparisons in the way that AGW deniers and creationists / anti-vax groups work.
        It’s staggering how alike they are and yet they cannot see it.

  5. So yeah; tomorrow’s heroes.
    One question I constantly ask these people is; show me what is wrong in the published research and also the research that they have done or others that is credible and contrary to the bulk on which our work is based. Most either refer to Watts or change the subject. It’s nothing short of insanity!

  6. […] over at “Watching the Deniers”, posted about Anthony Watts upcoming Australia tour. I couldn’t help but initially want to go to the event, however, I’ve since changed my mind; […]

  7. Think Big says:

    Two shows in Emerald? Must be alot of deniers up there!

  8. Tim says:

    or the opposite; need more turn to convert the enviro-heathens! lol
    I’m not speaking from experience – I don’t Emerald, it could be only a small venue and a stack of interest.

  9. Mekhong Kurt says:

    What’s Watt’s background anyway? I’ve not had much luck googling him, beyond learning he has an extensive background as a television weatherman and now a radio one. I *think* I read somewhere that he has only a bachelor’s degree — is that true?

    In any case, though weather of course is one important aspect of climate, having even a basketful of degrees through the doctoral level in meteorology does not a climate scientist make, and I think that’s Watt’s educational background.

    Besides, as has been amply proven repeatedly, including right here in this blog, he outright manipulates data to reach the *opposite* conclusion(s) a research or study report actually says. This practice is otherwise known as “lying through one’s teeth.”

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: