Goreathon yields 707 views in 24 hours

[westwall]

WORLDWIDE! Yep, the AGW movement is so powerful and so driven by science that no one gives a poo anymore.



Al Gore's 24 Hours of Reality extravaganza took place on October 22. Anybody noticed?

On YouTube it has been a whopping success: A total of 707 views worldwide!

Congratulations Al!

Here is the Climate Reality statistical breakdown:

24 Hours of Reality: Asia

•by Climate Reality
•2 days ago
•185 views



24 Hours of Reality: South America Finale

•by Climate Reality
•2 days ago
•66 views

24 Hours of Reality : Europe Finale

•by Climate Reality
•2 days ago
•57 views



24 Hours of Reality: Africa

•by Climate Reality
•2 days ago
•96 views
24 Hours of Reality: North America Finale

•by Climate Reality
•2 days ago
•133 views
America & Caribbean

•by Climate Reality
•2 days ago
•170 views






So they had to resort to propaganda BS to prop him up!


Great job, Al! Love, Al": Gore's own employees send thousands of astroturf tweets supporting him, then they boast that thousands of tweets supported him

[Oct. 25: Gore's "Climate Reality" employees send out an email boasting that Gore's "24 Hours of Reality" resulted in 21,074 tweets!]
Twitter / ClimateReality: .@Twitter is a powerful tool. ...

[Oct 13: Gore's "Climate Reality" employees called for Twitter accounts that could be used to send Tweets supporting Gore] @Twitter is a powerful tool. Donate your status to tell others to watch 24 Hours of Reality #CostOfCarbon 10/22 24 Hours of Reality ? The Cost of Carbon
Twitter / Search - "We can’t afford the #CostOfCarbon"

[Gore's astroturf Twitter accounts spit out endless blocks of tweets all containing the exact same phrase]
Astroturfing - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

On the Internet, astroturfers use software to mask their identity. Sometimes one individual operates over many personas to give the impression of widespread support for their client's agenda.



Tom Nelson: "Great job, Al! Love, Al": Gore's own employees send thousands of astroturf tweets supporting him, then they boast that thousands of tweets supported him

 

[percysunshine]

And of the 707 views, 700 of them were looking for Healthcare.gov

 

[R.C. Christian]

This thread is full of win.

 

[Abraham3]

As of right now, the site has 184,000 likes.

I had never heard of this. Thanks for the info.

 

[skookerasbil]

more k00k losing.......

 

[Abraham3]

More of your fantasizing.

 

[Abraham3]

I'm curious, where is it that one sees the number of "views"?

 

[mamooth]

Again, Gore Derangement Syndrome is so 2007.

 

[Superbus]

Artificially boosting its viewer base has obviously proven to be useful (insert sarcastic comment here.) I bet that this thread has received more views than the actual "Goreathon" itself. However, it does not explain why Gore's stream had so few views. Perhaps they were running on fumes for their advertising budget?

 

[flacaltenn]

As of right now, the site has 184,000 likes.

I had never heard of this. Thanks for the info.

The Goreons have been busy.. Must suck to HAVE to like something for public relations reasons..

 

[flacaltenn]

I'm curious, where is it that one sees the number of "views"?

7246 views as of right now.. And UNFORTUNATELY --- one of those is mine since the settings AUTOMATICALLY start the video and count the view.. Tho I only lasted 20 seconds.

YouTube "views" also don't discriminate between UNIQUE users.. This is embarrassing...

Can't tell ya where to find the views Abraham --- I'd be BIASING the results of this experiment.. And encouraging the propaganda machine..

 

[Abraham3]

So... I assume that despite the statistical walloping you received at the hands of IfItzMe, you still believe global warming has been caused primarily by increased TSI.

Do you believe that warming has cost us anything?

What damage do you believe it has caused?

Do you think we should try to reduce warming?

 

[RollingThunder]

WORLDWIDE! Yep, the AGW movement is so powerful and so driven by science that no one gives a poo anymore.

Al Gore's 24 Hours of Reality extravaganza took place on October 22. Anybody noticed?

On YouTube it has been a whopping success: A total of 707 views worldwide!

You are so gullible, walleyed. What denier cult blog handed you this silly turd of a story?

The "24 Hours of Reality" presentation was a streaming webcast on the climaterealityproject.org website. This recent one was the third annual webcast. Last year's webcast had a viewership of 16 million people worldwide who tuned in and watched at least one hour of the show during the first 24 hours while it was being livecast. The viewership figures this year were probably higher.

Viewership of this year's presentation was not limited to the number who viewed portions and snippets of it that may have wound up on YouTube, as you deceitfully try to suggest.

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

You are so gullible, walleyed. What denier cult blog handed you this silly turd of a story?

Yeah, it's the "deniers" who are the cult.

 

[Abraham3]

There are no cults in this debate. Just ignorance.

 

[westwall]

So... I assume that despite the statistical walloping you received at the hands of IfItzMe, you still believe global warming has been caused primarily by increased TSI.

Do you believe that warming has cost us anything?

What damage do you believe it has caused?

Do you think we should try to reduce warming?

It costs us less than being cold.

None that is measurable.

No.

 

[westwall]

There are no cults in this debate. Just ignorance.

Oh, so very untrue. There are those of us who believe in the scientific method, and there are you guys....who don't.

 

[Vox]

So... I assume that despite the statistical walloping you received at the hands of IfItzMe, you still believe global warming has been caused primarily by increased TSI.

he did not receive any statistical walloping. it was the other way around and he actually creamed fitsyou

Do you believe that warming has cost us anything?

NO

What damage do you believe it has caused?

nothing

Do you think we should try to reduce warming?

NO

 

[Abraham3]

So... I assume that despite the statistical walloping you received at the hands of IfItzMe, you still believe global warming has been caused primarily by increased TSI.

Do you believe that warming has cost us anything?

What damage do you believe it has caused?

Do you think we should try to reduce warming?

It costs us less than being cold.

Perhaps. But that was not the question because it's not getting cold. It's getting hot.

None that is measurable.

If this were Wikipedia, there'd be some comment from the editors about the use of weasel words. I would contend that a number of critical parameters are fully mensurable: temperature of air, land and sea, loss of ice and snow, the rise of sea level, the melting of the world's tundra. The damage those have, are and will cause is broad and I suppose, for some, easy to close your eyes to. But to even imply there is no damage is foolish.

No.

I am willing to accept my share of the blame should my conclusions turn out to be faulty. After all, I have reason to believe as I do. My beliefs derive from the vast majority of the world's experts on this topic. You, on the other hand, take a very poorly supported position. I just wanted to make certain you were also willing to accept your share of the blame should your conclusions turn out to be faulty. I ask, of course, because you would have such difficulty justifying them in a preventably overheated world.

 

[Abraham3]

There are no cults in this debate. Just ignorance.

Oh, so very untrue. There are those of us who believe in the scientific method, and there are you guys....who don't.

Perhaps I missed your answer, but do you contend that the hundreds of peer reviewed studies used in the assembly of the IPCC's AR5 did not make use of the scientific method?

And have you identified those exercises of the scientific method that have refuted AGW?