Hits

When we were having all the site crashes in October, John A turned off the hit counter to economize on space. We were running about 5000 hits/day at the time. We’ve been running without hit information for a few months. John figured out some way of getting the counter back without using as much space as the previous counter and turned it back on about a week ago. We’re now running at 8500 hits/day, a quarter million/month. Thanks for visiting. Quiet people are allowed to comment too.

9 Comments

  1. David H
    Posted Mar 6, 2006 at 2:54 PM | Permalink | Reply

    I’d like to see the hit counter on the other place. They seem to have nothing better to talk about than cartoons.

  2. Ian
    Posted Mar 6, 2006 at 3:19 PM | Permalink | Reply

    climateaudit (rank 297,352) traffic — http://www.alexa.com/data/details/traffic_details?q=&url=www.climateaudit.org
    realclimate (rank 135,824) traffic — http://www.alexa.com/data/details/traffic_details?q=&url=www.realclimate.org/

    I think Steve’s site does pretty well for a ‘fringe’ skeptic site ;-)

    I would say that this data underestimates Steve’s site popularity since Alexa relies on people installing a special toolbar (basically spyware). I know it is presumptuous of me to state this, but I believe the people on this site are more scientifically minded/computer savvy and so would be less likely to be using the Alexa toolbar.

  3. John A
    Posted Mar 6, 2006 at 5:03 PM | Permalink | Reply

    would say that this data underestimates Steve’s site popularity since Alexa relies on people installing a special toolbar (basically spyware). I know it is presumptuous of me to state this, but I believe the people on this site are more scientifically minded/computer savvy and so would be less likely to be using the Alexa toolbar.

    There is another, more prosaic reason. Here are the stats for platform type:

    Platform %
    Indeterminable 41%
    Windows XP 37%
    Windows 2000 8%
    Mac OS X 5%
    Linux 5%
    Windows 3%
    Windows 98 1%
    Solaris 0%
    Windows 2003 0%
    Windows ME 0%
    BSD 0%
    Mac OS Classic 0%

    And this is the stats for browser type:

    Browser Version %
    Crawler/Search Engine Indeterminable 25%
    Internet Explorer 6.0 24%
    Firefox 1.5.0.1 11%
    Firefox 1.0.7 4%
    Mozilla 1.8 3%
    Mozilla Indeterminable 2%
    Safari 417.8 2%
    Konqueror 3.4 2%
    Firefox 1.5 2%
    Safari 1.3 1%
    Crawler/Search Engine 5.5 1%
    Internet Explorer 5.5 1%
    Internet Explorer 5.23 1%
    Netscape 7.1 1%
    Internet Explorer 5.01 1%
    Firefox 1.0.6 1%
    Netscape 7.2 1%

    Now the Alexa toolbar only runs on Internet Explorer which in turn only runs on Windows (there is a version for Mac but no MacHead I know uses it). So since nearly half our readers are not using IE even though most of them are running Windows would mean that even if all of our readers who use IE were to install Alexa it would still miss (at least) half our traffic.

    There must be a better way to monitor traffic but I don’t know what it is. Yet.

  4. Bob K
    Posted Mar 6, 2006 at 5:14 PM | Permalink | Reply

    Realclimate displays a count of their visitors since Dec. 10, 2004.

    Out of idle curiousity, I wrote down the figures for the past couple months.

    Jan. 5th count was 708,573.

    Feb. 5th count was 789,427.

    Today the count was 880,011.

    Climateaudit seems to be doing very well in relation to them.

  5. Bob K
    Posted Mar 6, 2006 at 5:22 PM | Permalink | Reply

    I don’t see my browser listed, John. Am I the only one that uses the Opera browser and identifies as Opera?

    I visit this site generally at least a couple times a day.

    Love the analysis being done here, even if I don’t comprehend it entirely.

  6. Steve McIntyre
    Posted Mar 6, 2006 at 5:23 PM | Permalink | Reply

    #4 – I think that there’s apples and oranges here. I think that their count is for visits; our hits count page views, and people usually go to 2-3 pages per visit. I suspect that the average number of page views here per visit is higher than there, but that’s just a hunch. There’s also a lot of spam traffic; I don’t know how it affects the stats, but both sites probably have the same situation.

  7. Doug L
    Posted Mar 6, 2006 at 5:42 PM | Permalink | Reply

    For lack of a better place for this, I have posted a poll on a private message board for “civilians” which reads:

    Have you ever read or heard media reports that assert that scientists believe today’s climate is warmer than it’s been in at least a thousand years?

    The results with about forty percent of likely respondents so far is:

    yes: 15
    no: 1
    other: 1

    the message board is for investors and the poll is posted in an off topic area where global warming does get discussed sometimes.

  8. Posted Mar 6, 2006 at 11:04 PM | Permalink | Reply

    Why not run an external statistics counter? They are free, and a snap to install. I use StatCounter as it has a pretty interface and it seems more reliable than some others (http://www.statcounter.com). SiteMeter is very popular amongst political blogs (http://www.sitemeter.com) and can easily be configured to let anyone see your hits whenever they want.

  9. McCall
    Posted Mar 12, 2006 at 4:10 AM | Permalink | Reply

    Again, I’ve had a post censored at RC; this time on their not-so-veiled attempt to taint Dr. Richard Lindzen, in part by attacking (or allowing posts that attack) implied financial ties, without actually mentioning who? Some of these alleged ties are as tenuous as their statistics.

    I tried simply to point out that GISS’s Dr. James Hansen, whom RC champions in at least one recent thread, has been the announced beneficiary of a $250,000 dollar award by the Heinz Foundation; and should we be suspicious of his AGW pronouncements at politically opportunistic times? But like the informative ocean weak-acid/buffer post I tried several weaks ago, this too was blocked.

    The double-standard at RC’s post-review policy is obvious. Will such policy be embraced at Deltoid, soon — or is Dr Lambert’s slow deliberation in reviving old AGW climate threads just another form of controlling the debate on his blog?

Post a Comment

Required fields are marked *

*
*

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 2,883 other followers

%d bloggers like this: