Hi Jen,
All things considered, I thought the debate went very well. The show of hands at the end indicated 50-50. I have had complimentary calls today. The following is a summary that Des Moore has sent around.
Climate Debate – Hawthorn Town Hall – 19 Nov
I attended last night a debate between Professor David Karoly, who is an adviser to Professor Garnaut and Victorian Premier John Brumby, and William Kininmonth at the Hawthorn Town Hall on “We should be concerned with human-caused climate change”.
I estimate that about 220 people attended and there was an “active” question time after the speakers completed their presentations. A show-of-hands vote taken at the conclusion suggested a slight majority in favour of WK.
I will not atttempt here to analyse the issues raised by either side other than to mention the heavy reliance on modelling by DK to “prove” his points. However, it is worth noting the marked contrast in style of presentation, with DK adopting an aggressive approach (that provoked an initial adverse reaction from the audience) and WK adopting a calm relaxed one.
There is little doubt that DK’s approach lost him “votes” and, more importantly, left an impression that his expertise was not necessarily something on which much reliance should be placed. Indeed, it served to (again) confirm doubts about the basis of the science used by the IPCC, for which DK was a lead author…
My guess is that DK was a bit taken aback by the audience response, including a number of sensible questions…
Des Moore
The local Community TV Channel 31 filmed the event to show later and they said they would send a copy to me.
Regards,
Bill
Jennifer Marohasy BSc PhD is a critical thinker with expertise in the scientific method.
just received as an email:
REVIEW OF DEBATE ON ANTHROPOGENIC CLIMATE CHANGE HELD AT HAWTHORN TOWN HALL ON 19TH NOVEMBER 2008
I attended the debate on ‘ Should we be Concerned with Anthropogenic Climate Change’ at the Hawthorn Town Hall on Wednesday 19th November.
The debate was characterized by the very noticeable difference in the presentation styles of the debaters. William Kininmonth presented in a quiet and competent way and David Karoly in a forceful and also competent way. Both deserve credit for being prepared to stand up and be counted in open debate.
In my opinion, Professor Karoly appeared, not to judge the audience well and to lecture as if we were first year students at best. He astounded with claims that the IPCC is not a political organization, that peer review is objective, and that climate models are proving to be accurate predictors. To me and to many of the attendees he was not able, despite the elegance of his presentations, to demonstrate the accuracy of any of these claims and was dismissive of certain pertinent questions that did not fit his perceptions.
There were excellent copies from papers by various authors available for comment and proceeding were filmed by professionals.
At the end of the evening on a show of hands, a substantial majority denied that the evidence supported anthropogenic global warming.
Review by Colin M. Barton PhD.
Interesting to see the review by Des Moore (who is DM?) gives the show of hands a 50-50 result whereas Colin Barton gives a substantial majority to the good guys.
Also interesting to see the review by Des Moore gives qualifications to David Karoly but nothing about Bill’s background.
Even-handed?
G Brown asks “who is [Des Moore]”. Suggest he tries a useful WWW tool called “Google”! Just google “”Des Moore” Melbourne”, GB.
Never heard of a 50/50 vote when one side lost. I was there and observed a large majority of hands in the air to substantiate my assessment.