Search HotWhopper

Loading...

Saturday, May 24, 2014

The WattMeter: Reading the mood at WUWT

Sou | 4:50 PM 21 Comments - leave a comment

This is fun. You might have noticed an addition to the sidebar. A computer wizz has sent me a link to a gizmo or WUWT-idjit or, more formally, a WattMeter. They are word clouds reflecting the content of comments at WUWT. They are automatically updated daily.

Here are some larger versions. The first is a measure of the mood of WUWT in general for the day.

SourceCruelClimate


The next one is meter of WUWT ideology and political mood, also reflecting the mood of the day.

Source: CruelClimate

And there's a third one that is a cumulative version over the time of the second one above, since the word cloud was first created.

SourceCruelClimate

21 comments:

  1. Excellent W-eejit!

    There's some ambiguity in what is represented in Number 3.

    Is it the ideological and political mindset subset, and should be compared to Number 2 only? In which case there's little difference...

    Whereas, if 3 is the total cloud, then there is real hope in seeing that Number 1 is concerned with actual science rather than ideological dogma. Heck, the word 'think' even makes an appearance!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Neat, isn't it.

      I think that 3 is the same as 2, except the second one is just the last day whereas the third one is since the WattMeter was created. In other words, nothing much has changed since the WattMeter was switched on :(

      The first one would be all comments from today. It shows that not everyone at WUWT is obsessed by money, power and control. Or not today, anyway.

      Delete
    2. idunno, I've update the text to clarify.

      Delete
    3. Hi Sou,

      I'd suggest that you might like to post Number 1 on the sidebar; looks like Number 2 and 3 are never going to change. They're amost identical.

      They are fun though; do they make coherent thoughts? Here's number 1, in approx descending order...

      Data; climate warming years; models time temperature change; global science model right...

      Hmm, well, that's not quite English grammar, but much more coherent than most of their contributions taken individually. Perhaps some sort of hive intelligence at work?

      Delete
  2. I wonder if it would be possible to develop automated tools by which the three Freudian variants of denial - its not happening, its not because of me, its not so bad - could be identified. We could then use WUWT to see how deniers shift between the three variants over time.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It could be interesting to see if there are shifts over time, Millicent. I know some people think there's been a shift among deniers, but I don't see it at WUWT.

      For every fake sceptic at WUWT who writes "I don't know of anyone who disputes the greenhouse effect" or "I don't know anyone who doesn't agree that humans have *some* effect" or "Everyone would be in the 97%", I can show you dozens of fake sceptics at WUWT who shout their denial of the greenhouse effect and/or that humans are causing global warming.

      Heck, there are WUWT regulars who still claim that the hottest year on record was in the 1930s and we're heading for an ice age. Anthony even posts "ice age cometh" articles.

      Hard to tell if it's that people stop reading WUWT after they realise what a pile of BS they are being fed and all that's left are the raving ratbags, or if it's been the same lot of raving ratbags all along :(

      Delete
    2. "It could be interesting to see if there are shifts over time, Millicent."

      That was my immediate thought..

      Lewandowsky might just have himself a conspiracy ideation meter, with the number and relative growths of concepts neatly indexed. It's probably not that different from the various "trending" applications that are already knocking about, but this widget has made me realise the staggering wealth of information that is lying buried in the mess of internet vomitus.

      My evil overlord gene has just been demethylated...

      Delete
  3. Off topic, but Watts has done another baseline blunder. He compares an NCEP model forecast baselined 1999-2010 with a Cryosphere today graph based 1979-2008. I've left the comment below, so doubtless, the paragon of reliability and honesty will issue a correction ...

    but if we then go to the Northern hemisphere sea ice plot from Cryosphere today we can see how significant this would be if summer came out with a positive anomaly.

    Not really, the model uses a different baseline. http://origin.cpc.ncep.noaa.gov/products/people/wwang/cfsv2fcst/

    You're not very good with baselines are you?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It looks as if you are the only one who noticed, Phil. Some of the comments are bordering on insane.

      Delete
    2. Not to mention the fact that the NCEP forecast he cites seems to have a history of running high on the absolute amount.

      Delete
  4. These widgets are a good representation of WUWT, considering how most of the comments there are just nonsensical "word salad" anyway. You could probably take the data from this and create a "WUWT Comment Generator" that would randomly belch out "skeptical" replies to Anthony's threads. Nobody over there would know the difference : )

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. heh, i was about to suggest feeding their text to a Dissociated Press-style generator, but then remembered that the good old Twat-o-Tron already does a very good job of generating plausibly imbecilic WUTWAT-style comments, without any of those GIGO mathematrickal computer models.

      Delete
  5. Interesting. It's like an intimate view into the thought process of your average Wattie. But really it's no surprise. They continue to bellow their devotion their ideology wherever they can (for many it's a compulsive addiction), and for years it's been the same old, well trodden memes. (we've all come across them so many times now it's just become tiring. Do they really think that after the 10,000th time of hearing there has been no warming for xx years that we will just eventually crack and relent) When I interact with Watties on the internet, I often get confused. It's as if you are always talking to the same person, like they are part of the Borg collective, only for deniers, it's the Wattie collective. They will often defensively and robotically say something like 'we are independent thinkers', but the reality is that they just parrot the the same old debunked twaddle.

    ReplyDelete
  6. If a scientist in psychology were to use this meter, would it be a breach of integrity(tm) ?
    After all the fuss they made about Lewandowsky, this is quite ironic. But very interesting. Although this kind of meter can be easily misinterpreted (results here may be surprising).

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Cannot see why; it's publicly available material, unless there is some way that Watts can claim copywrite.

      It looks like the same principle as analysing newspaper articles or advertisments on TV

      Delete
    2. No it wouldn't breach integrity :) The Watties, being such models of integrity themselves, would probably yell and scream that it's unethical :)

      The same thing here wouldn't have words like government and power and control and money, but it would have the word "deniers" and derivatives in big bold letters.

      BTW WUWT has its own word cloud in the sidebar but it's just the tags on his articles.

      Delete
  7. As we head towards the Arctic minimum I predict that by end of june antarctica will be the main mood

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That cycle has been obvious for some years now :)

      Delete
  8. It would be interesting to see the same tool applied to HotWhopper. Would the results be similar because of the focus on WUWT?

    ReplyDelete
  9. I would guess Wondering, Puzzled Perennial,

    ReplyDelete
  10. Looking at the current Wattsmeter, it appears that the gang is quite wroth (froth?) about todays EPA rules.

    Hardly surprising, really. Actual regulation of CO2 emissions strikes incredible fear into the hearts of these (ahem) rugged individualists. So so many conspiracy theories...

    ReplyDelete

Instead of commenting as "Anonymous", please comment using "Name/URL" and your name, initials or pseudonym or whatever. You can leave the "URL" box blank. This isn't mandatory. You can also sign in using your Google ID, Wordpress ID etc as indicated.

Click here to read the HotWhopper comment policy.