IMO, [Anthony] Watts handled himself very well in the on-air interview and also in the extended written interview. Nothing that he said was unreasonable. It is rather bizarre that on this particular show, I came across as the ‘denier’ and Watts as the ‘lukewarmer.’
The outrage over Watts seems to be not so much what he said, as over his being given any airtime at all. On a program discussing climate science, is Watts the appropriate spokesperson? I would say not. However, on a program discussing the public debate over climate science, Watts should be front and center. His blog WUWT has far and away the largest traffic of any climate blog in the world (as per Alexa). As such, Watts is a figure of central importance in the public debate on climate change. To those who don’t like this fact, I advise you to take the time to understand why WUWT is so successful and maybe you will learn something about the public debate on climate change.
Well said, Judy. You can read her full comments here. And, scroll down to see the Watts' interview for yourself.
And, for those of you who keep writing me, you see Judy (at the link) also describes Dr. Mueller's "faux conversion" from a climate 'skeptic' to believer. While I'm happy to get your email and Facebook messages, please do a little research on this topic and you'll see that as far back as 2004 Mueller's own writing clearly puts himself in the global warming "believer" category.
ADDITION: 6:30PM Monday. Meteorologist and former State Climatologist for the State of Colorado, Roger Pielke, Sr., adds his comments here. The intentional suppression of dissenting views pertaining to climate 'science' is one of the ugliest aspects of the field.