Watts Up With That (English Wikipedia)

Analysis of information sources in references of the Wikipedia article "Watts Up With That" in English language version.

refsWebsite

Global rank English rank

12books.google.com

3^rd place

5web.archive.org

1^st place

4theguardian.com

12^th place

11^th place

2archive.org

6^th place

2doi.org

2^nd place

1themonthly.com.au

low place

7,484^th place

1mediamatters.org

5,802^nd place

3,163^rd place

1geotimes.org

low place

1nasa.gov

75^th place

83^rd place

1ehclients.com

low place

1deccanherald.com

516^th place

291^st place

1nytimes.com

7^th place

1sciencemag.org

857^th place

3,832^nd place

1bbc.co.uk

8^th place

10^th place

1cbc.ca

115^th place

82^nd place

1bloomberg.com

99^th place

77^th place

1scientificamerican.com

896^th place

674^th place

1harvard.edu

18^th place

17^th place

1worldcat.org

5^th place

1nih.gov

4^th place

1gpo.gov

1,360^th place

845^th place

1ft.com

210^th place

157^th place

1alexa.com

1,103^rd place

1,358^th place

1bloggi.es

low place

alexa.com

"Alexa Site Information: Watts Up With That?". Alexa Internet. Archived from the original on 3 March 2016. Retrieved 5 September 2015.

archive.org

Grant 2011, "* The blog Watts Up With That? is a notorious hotbed of irrational AGW denialism * the massively trafficked denialist site Watts Up With That * Watts is best known for his very heavily trafficked blog Watts Up With That?, began in 2006, which provides not just a megaphone for himself but a rallying ground for other AGW deniers." Grant, John (2011). Denying Science: Conspiracy Theories, Media Distortions, and the War Against Reality. Prometheus Books. ISBN 978-1616144005. Retrieved 26 May 2015.
Grant 2011, p. 302: "Watts is best known for his very heavily trafficked blog Watts Up With That?, began in 2006, which provides not just a megaphone for himself but a rallying ground for other AGW deniers, notably Christopher Monckton. The blog played an important role in the Climategate fiasco, through its dissemination of the hacked CRU emails." Grant, John (2011). Denying Science: Conspiracy Theories, Media Distortions, and the War Against Reality. Prometheus Books. ISBN 978-1616144005. Retrieved 26 May 2015.

bbc.co.uk

The eight major investigations covered by secondary sources include: House of Commons Science and Technology Committee (UK); Independent Climate Change Review (UK); International Science Assessment Panel (UK); Pennsylvania State University first panel and second panel (US); United States Environmental Protection Agency (US); Department of Commerce (US); National Science Foundation (US)

bloggi.es

2014.bloggi.es

"The 2014 Bloggies". Retrieved 5 February 2015.

bloomberg.com

The eight major investigations covered by secondary sources include: House of Commons Science and Technology Committee (UK); Independent Climate Change Review (UK); International Science Assessment Panel (UK); Pennsylvania State University first panel and second panel (US); United States Environmental Protection Agency (US); Department of Commerce (US); National Science Foundation (US)

books.google.com

Brainard 2015, p. 172: "At the other end of the spectrum are influential sites for "climate skeptics", such as Watts Up With That?, a blog run by meteorologist Anthony Watts, whom scientists have repeatedly criticized for misleading readers on subjects such as the reliability of the U.S. surface temperature record." Brainard, Curtis (2015). Hansen, Anders; Cox, Robert (eds.). The Routledge Handbook of Environment and Communication. Routledge. ISBN 978-1-134-52131-9.
Mann 2013, pp. 27, 72, 222, "Since then, a number of other amateur climate change denial bloggers have arrived on the scene. Most prominent among them is Anthony Watts, a meteorologist...and founder of the site "Watts Up with That?" which has overtaken climate audit as the leading climate change denial blog." Mann, Michael (1 October 2013). The Hockey Stick and the Climate Wars: Dispatches from the Front Lines. Columbia University Press. ISBN 978-0231152556.
Dunlap & McCright 2011, p. 153: "In recent years these conservative media outlets have been supplemented (and to some degree supplanted) by the conservative blogosphere, and numerous blogs now constitute a vital element of the denial machine...the most popular North American blogs are run by a retired TV meteorologist (wattsupwiththat.com)...Having this powerful, pervasive, and multifaceted media apparatus at its service provides the denial machine with a highly effective means of spreading its message." Dunlap, Riley; McCright, Aaron (2011). "Organised Climate Change Denial". In Dryzek, John S.; Norgaard, Richard B.; Schlosberg, David (eds.). The Oxford Handbook of Climate Change and Society. Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0199566600.
Farmer & Cook 2013, p. 462: "One of the highest trafficked climate blogs is wattsupwiththat.com, a website that publishes climate misinformation on a daily basis." Farmer, Thomas G.; Cook, John (2013). Climate Change Science: A Modern Synthesis: Volume 1-The Physical Climate. Springer Science & Business Media. ISBN 9789400757578.
Schneider & Nocke 2014, p. 171: "Despite the well-known facts under discussion, the original graph, based on a single outdated study published in 1991, continues to reappear again and again in climate skeptical media, trying to prove that the sun, not anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions, is causing global warming. The original curve appears, for example, on Anthony Watts' climate skeptical blog "Watts Up With That?" in an article posted in 2011." Schneider, Birgit; Nocke, Thomas (2014). Image Politics of Climate Change: Visualizations, Imaginations, Documentations. transcript Verlag. ISBN 9783839426104.
Christopher Booker (16 December 2009). The Real Global Warming Disaster: Is the Obsession with 'climate Change' Turning Out to be the Most Costly Scientific Blunder in History?. A&C Black. pp. 198–199. ISBN 978-1-4411-1052-7.
Anders & Cox 2015, p. 172: "In 2009, an unknown party acquired a large cache of private emails between climate scientists...and published them online. Cherry-picking quotes in order to make the scientists appear as though they were discussing data manipulation, bloggers such as Watts whipped up a pseudo-scandal that reverberated for years despite the fact that a series of nine investigations in the U.S. and the U.K. cleared the scientists of any wrongdoing. Anders, Hansen; Cox, Robert (2015). The Routledge Handbook of Environment and Communication. Routledge. ISBN 978-1134521319.
Anshelm & Hultman 2014, pp. 154–156: "Climategate fundamentally damaged confidence in the IPCC climate reports and decisively changed the conditions for the Copenhagen negotiations...Climategate and the failure of Copenhagen coincided with a widespread decline in public acceptance that global warming was happening, was caused by humans, and was a serious threat...Climategate can also explain the erosion of public trust in scientists as sources of information on global warming after 2010." Anshelm, Jonas; Hultman, Martin (2014). Discourses of Global Climate Change: Apocalyptic Framing and Political Antagonisms. Routledge. ISBN 978-1317671060.
Dunlap & McCright 2011, p. 153: "Having this powerful, pervasive and multifaceted media apparatus at its service provides the denial machine with a highly effective means of spreading its message, as reflected quite recently by its success in turning a tiny and highly unrepresentative sample of thirteen years worth of personal e-mails hacked from the Climate Research Unit at the University of East Anglia into a major scandal that has generated a decline in public belief in climate change and trust in climate scientists...despite the fact that several investigations have concluded that the e-mails neither demonstrate unethical behavior nor undermine climate science." Dunlap, Riley; McCright, Aaron (2011). "Organised Climate Change Denial". In Dryzek, John S.; Norgaard, Richard B.; Schlosberg, David (eds.). The Oxford Handbook of Climate Change and Society. Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0199566600.
Phelan 2014, p. 123: "Watts Up With That was created in 2006 by Californian meteorologist Anthony Watts...From its modest beginnings, Pearce suggests it is now "perhaps the most visited climate website in the world...with more than two million unique visitors a month" Phelan, Sean (2014). Neoliberalism, Media and the Political. Palgrave Macmillan. ISBN 978-1137308368.
Mooney & Kirshenbaum 2010, p. 114: "Anthony Watts is an extremely popular blogger, drawing hundreds of comments per post and well over half a million visitors per month. Yet his blog contains highly questionable information–presented very "scientifically" of course, replete with charts and graphs–but all directed toward the end of making the scientific consensus on human-caused global warming seem faulty (in fact, it's extremely robust) Mooney, Chris; Kirshenbaum, Sheril (2010). Summary of Unscientific America: How Scientific Illiteracy Threatens Our Future. Basic Books. ISBN 978-0465019175.
Mooney & Kirshenbaum 2010, p. 109: "With just days to go until voting closed, the 2008 weblog awards - an annual online popularity contest in which nearly 1 million voters pick their favorite opiners across forty-eight topic categories-featured a tight race for Best Science Blog...In the end, Watts Up With That defeated Pharyngula by a vote of 14,150 votes to 12,238." Mooney, Chris; Kirshenbaum, Sheril (2010). Summary of Unscientific America: How Scientific Illiteracy Threatens Our Future. Basic Books. ISBN 978-0465019175.

cbc.ca

The eight major investigations covered by secondary sources include: House of Commons Science and Technology Committee (UK); Independent Climate Change Review (UK); International Science Assessment Panel (UK); Pennsylvania State University first panel and second panel (US); United States Environmental Protection Agency (US); Department of Commerce (US); National Science Foundation (US)

deccanherald.com

The eight major investigations covered by secondary sources include: House of Commons Science and Technology Committee (UK); Independent Climate Change Review (UK); International Science Assessment Panel (UK); Pennsylvania State University first panel and second panel (US); United States Environmental Protection Agency (US); Department of Commerce (US); National Science Foundation (US)

doi.org

Kirilenko & Stepchenkova 2014, p. 9: "The most authoritative climate change skepticism web sites included Watts Up With That? and Climate Depot" Kirilenko, Andrei; Stepchenkova, Svetlana (2014). "Public microblogging on climate change: One year of Twitter worldwide". Global Environmental Change. 26: 171–182. doi:10.1016/j.gloenvcha.2014.02.008.
Biello, David (2010). "Negating Climategate". Scientific American. 302 (2): 16. Bibcode:2010SciAm.302b..16B. doi:10.1038/scientificamerican0210-16a. ISSN 0036-8733. PMID 20128212. In fact, nothing in the stolen material undermines the scientific consensus that climate change is happening and that humans are to blame

ehclients.com

csm.ehclients.com

David Norton (2010). "Constructing "Climategate" and Tracking Chatter in an Age of Web n.0" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on 2015-06-25. Retrieved 2015-06-24. Two days passed before links to the stolen data were suddenly posted to two other conservative blogs: The Air Vent and Watts Up With That. Within hours of the breaking news, commenters on Watts Up With That coined the phrase "climategate" and even began to call for its strategic deployment as a framing device. Soon thereafter, a prominent conservative blogger in the United Kingdom ran a headline referring to the incident as "climategate," and Twitter users began to follow suit

ft.com

Harvey, Fiona (8 March 2010). "E-mail leaks that clouded climate issue". Financial Times. Retrieved 15 September 2010.

geotimes.org

Gramling, Carolyn (August 16, 2007). "Error in NASA climate data sparks debate". Geotimes. American Geological Institute. Retrieved 10 September 2010.

gpo.gov

Lubchenco, Jane (2 December 2009) House Select Committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming (House Select Committee). "The Administration's View on the State of Climate Science". House Hearing, 111 Congress. U.S. Government Printing Office. "...the e-mails really do nothing to undermine the very strong scientific consensus and the independent scientific analyses of thousands of scientists around the world that tell us that the Earth is warming and that the warming is largely a result of human activities." As quoted in the report published by Office of Inspector General.

harvard.edu

ui.adsabs.harvard.edu

Biello, David (2010). "Negating Climategate". Scientific American. 302 (2): 16. Bibcode:2010SciAm.302b..16B. doi:10.1038/scientificamerican0210-16a. ISSN 0036-8733. PMID 20128212. In fact, nothing in the stolen material undermines the scientific consensus that climate change is happening and that humans are to blame

mediamatters.org

Fitzsimmons, Jill (12 November 2012). "Meet The Climate Denial Machine". Media Matters. Retrieved 26 May 2015.

nasa.gov

data.giss.nasa.gov

"Global temperature trends: 2007 summation". Goddard Institute for Space Studies. NASA. Archived from the original on 21 January 2008. Retrieved 15 September 2010.

nih.gov

pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov

Biello, David (2010). "Negating Climategate". Scientific American. 302 (2): 16. Bibcode:2010SciAm.302b..16B. doi:10.1038/scientificamerican0210-16a. ISSN 0036-8733. PMID 20128212. In fact, nothing in the stolen material undermines the scientific consensus that climate change is happening and that humans are to blame

nytimes.com

The eight major investigations covered by secondary sources include: House of Commons Science and Technology Committee (UK); Independent Climate Change Review (UK); International Science Assessment Panel (UK); Pennsylvania State University first panel and second panel (US); United States Environmental Protection Agency (US); Department of Commerce (US); National Science Foundation (US)

sciencemag.org

news.sciencemag.org

The eight major investigations covered by secondary sources include: House of Commons Science and Technology Committee (UK); Independent Climate Change Review (UK); International Science Assessment Panel (UK); Pennsylvania State University first panel and second panel (US); United States Environmental Protection Agency (US); Department of Commerce (US); National Science Foundation (US)

scientificamerican.com

Biello, David (2010). "Negating Climategate". Scientific American. 302 (2): 16. Bibcode:2010SciAm.302b..16B. doi:10.1038/scientificamerican0210-16a. ISSN 0036-8733. PMID 20128212. In fact, nothing in the stolen material undermines the scientific consensus that climate change is happening and that humans are to blame

theguardian.com

Fred Pearce, "Search for hacker may lead police back to East Anglia's climate research unit", The Guardian, 9 February 2010.
George Monbiot (15 May 2009). "How to disprove Christopher Booker in 26 seconds". The Guardian. Retrieved 11 April 2010.
Leo Hickman (24 February 2010). "Academic attempts to take the hot air out of climate science debate". The Guardian. Retrieved 3 April 2010.
Hickman, Leo (1 March 2013). "Climate sceptics 'capture' the Bloggies' science category". The Guardian environment blog. Retrieved 5 February 2015.

themonthly.com.au

Manne 2012: "More importantly, it was becoming clear that the most effective denialist media weapon was not the newspapers or television but the internet. A number of influential websites, like Watts Up With That?, Climate Skeptic and Climate Depot, were established." Manne, Robert (August 2012). "A dark victory: How vested interests defeated climate science". The Monthly. pp. 22–29.

web.archive.org

"Global temperature trends: 2007 summation". Goddard Institute for Space Studies. NASA. Archived from the original on 21 January 2008. Retrieved 15 September 2010.
David Norton (2010). "Constructing "Climategate" and Tracking Chatter in an Age of Web n.0" (PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on 2015-06-25. Retrieved 2015-06-24. Two days passed before links to the stolen data were suddenly posted to two other conservative blogs: The Air Vent and Watts Up With That. Within hours of the breaking news, commenters on Watts Up With That coined the phrase "climategate" and even began to call for its strategic deployment as a framing device. Soon thereafter, a prominent conservative blogger in the United Kingdom ran a headline referring to the incident as "climategate," and Twitter users began to follow suit
The eight major investigations covered by secondary sources include: House of Commons Science and Technology Committee (UK); Independent Climate Change Review (UK); International Science Assessment Panel (UK); Pennsylvania State University first panel and second panel (US); United States Environmental Protection Agency (US); Department of Commerce (US); National Science Foundation (US)
Lubchenco, Jane (2 December 2009) House Select Committee on Energy Independence and Global Warming (House Select Committee). "The Administration's View on the State of Climate Science". House Hearing, 111 Congress. U.S. Government Printing Office. "...the e-mails really do nothing to undermine the very strong scientific consensus and the independent scientific analyses of thousands of scientists around the world that tell us that the Earth is warming and that the warming is largely a result of human activities." As quoted in the report published by Office of Inspector General.
"Alexa Site Information: Watts Up With That?". Alexa Internet. Archived from the original on 3 March 2016. Retrieved 5 September 2015.

worldcat.org

Biello, David (2010). "Negating Climategate". Scientific American. 302 (2): 16. Bibcode:2010SciAm.302b..16B. doi:10.1038/scientificamerican0210-16a. ISSN 0036-8733. PMID 20128212. In fact, nothing in the stolen material undermines the scientific consensus that climate change is happening and that humans are to blame