Banner image from the RealClimate web site, Climate science from climate scientists. Graphic: RealClimate

10 December 2014 ( –

  • Start date: 10 December 2004
  • Number of posts: 914
  • Number of comments: ~172,000
  • Number of comments with inline responses: 14,277
  • Minimum number of total unique page visits, and unique views, respectively: 19 Million, 35 Million
  • Number of guest posts: 100+
  • Number of mentions in newspaper sources indexed by LexisNexis: 225
  • Minimum number of contributors and guest authors: 105
  • Minimum number of times RealClimate was hacked: 2
  • Busiest month: December 2009
  • Busiest day of the week: Monday
  • Number of times the IPCC and the NIPCC are mentioned, respectively: 357, 5
  • Minimum number of Science papers arising from a blog post here: 1
  • Minimum number of RealClimate mentions in Web Of Science references: 14
  • Minimum number of RealClimate mentions in theses indexed by ProQuest: 33

Posts highest ranked by Google by year:

All numbers are estimates from latest available data, but no warranty is implied or provided so all use of these numbers is at your own risk.

Ten years of Realclimate: By the numbers


  1. Anonymous said...

    Too bad they didn't reveal the other "stats".

    I do not read Real Climate anymore because many of the posters and scientists there are far too entrenched to see the big picture.

    For example, they simply refuse to accept the methane threat, period.

    They also refuse to accept my (and other) proposals that they alone are the experts and therefore, need to be extremely strident in their warnings to the world in regards to the climate and what is happening. I still have these posts.

    They refuse this responsibility, claiming they're "just scientist" and not responsible. And they don't like a non-scientist pointing out anything they might be doing wrong (even though the non-scientist may indeed be right).

    That's not very scientific by the way. Science is supposed to change when it is incorrect. And the evidence is very clear, they're incorrect on how they are informing this unfolding threat to the world.

    They are not taking this seriously enough.

    I've given them several suggestions on how they might improve their efforts to warn the world. They were either ignored or ridiculed.

    So this begs the question, if these clowns don't take this seriously - why should anyone else?

    And if experts aren't united in their views about what is happening - why should anybody even listen?

    Actually, this leads to many other very negative lines of questions.

    There is a very distinct "you're not good enough to post here" sort of attitude on Real Climate because you're not "one of them". It's a kind of echo-chamber there, where they talk among themselves but ignore everyone else.

    Ever since Gavin left, the place has been nearly useless. I'm no longer a fan like I once was.

    So these "stats" they posted aren't very meaningful.

    Like much of their work, it's misleading and doesn't represent much of anything. Nor is it what is actually needed right now.

    What is needed is a strident warning to the world from the global experts and contributers to the state of the climate, but you won't ever see this anywhere on Real Climate, their either too afraid, too disunited or simply blind to their own results. Or perhaps simply too full of themselves to realize that they may have missed critical opportunities.

    I've many more authored articles on climate then even Real Climate has. But I don't have the reach or credentials, even though I'm using their own data. It's pretty obvious we're all in deep doo-doo, but we need experts to lay it on the line and tell the world without hesitation, reservation, timidness. They need to be strident, loud, insistent and firm, and this is something we're enot getting.

    Personally, I have no doubt that many scientists are deeply regretting already (or will come to regret) the fact that they didn't try harder to inform us all and get us to listen while there was still time to actually prevent some of the terrifying effects that are unfolding now.

    But what really pisses me off is their STILL not doing this when it is so bloody obvious that we need to declare a planetary emergency.

    Only the experts have the credentials, experience and platform to do this. But the experts are too busy playing with their data. We know enough NOW to sound the klaxon. The science should of course continue, but we need a very strong emphasis now on issuing warnings.

    This is what we need to see from Real Climate (and many, many other science sites), very, very badly.

    It's WAY overdue (by over a decade) - so these "stats" of theirs are actually rather pathetic. They represent a false sense of progress while still watching quietly the world go down in flames.  

  2. Anonymous said...

    Trying to make things better is just a cowardly way of not facing-up to the inevitable. Human beings are despicable entities that deserve whatever happens to them. The system needs to go. The world needs to be destroyed. Our time is up.  


Blog Template by Adam Every . Sponsored by Business Web Hosting Reviews