The professor offers much to think about and his thoughts and opinions would be great to hear on public radio. However, for my taste, an interview of this length would have worked better in a studio where the audio would have been of a higher quality and where some editing could take place.

What an interesting subject. He articulates well, not so much as a scientist, but as a trusted or respected person and I felt I benefited from his expertise. He talked to me, not AT me. I do think, however, I would have gotten more from the interview with a better set up. Up front I would have been a better listener, a less confused listener, had I been given some background about the circumstances surrounding his visit to Denver. The lead just didn't give me enough background on Professor Rapley, the controversy over his visit and the direction of the interview I was about to hear. I spent too much time providing my own context and, subsequently, fell behind at points during the interview.

And when the discussion turned to the Antarctic Wildlife Refuge it became unclear to me as to whether or not we were still having the global warming conversation. Maybe that is my shortcoming.

The professor seems to take seriously his position to engage the public and that might make him a great candidate for a call-in show?