It's amazing to me how many people, Meteorologists even, think global climate change (warming) is a hoax! Before we talk about what the TV people in Cleveland think here's proof that global warming is occuring. Just click here. The fact that industrialization is contributing to warming is explained further here: "Greenhouse gas concentrations in the atmosphere will increase during the next century unless greenhouse gas emissions decrease substantially from present levels." -Environmental Protection AgencyHere's an excerpt from the Cleveland Plain Dealer on how local TV meteorologists view climate change:
"This cry that 'We're all going to die' is an overreaction and just not good science," said Andre Bernier, a meteorologist at WJW Channel 8. "I don't think I personally know any meteorologists - here in Cleveland or anywhere else I've worked - who agree with the hype over human-induced warming."
The local TV weatherscape is indeed populated with on-air personalities who are pushing hard against the prevailing winds of climate science.
Bernier and Dick Goddard - the patriarch of Cleveland weather forecasters - predict the weather at WJW Channel 8.
Both cite natural fluctuations in the Earth's climate and dismiss the industrialization of the 20th century and the subsequent spike in atmospheric carbon dioxide as the cause for warming.
"I have a hunch that in 10 years we're all going to be longing for global warming because it will be so cold," Bernier said. His Web site, andrebernier.com, links to a Canadian documentary that suggests the same.
Others in the skeptic camp include meteorologists Jon Loufman at WOIO Channel 19, Mark Johnson at WEWS Channel 5 and Mark Nolan at WKYC Channel 3. Nolan has since moved to the news desk, but he said he still gets questions about his skeptic's stance.
The most notable example of dissent among meteorologists has been the Weather Channel's founder, John Coleman, now a TV forecaster in San Diego.
John Seiter, director of the American Meteorological Society said this when asked why many TV meteorologists don't buy into global warming: "Those of us in weather are used to seeing extremes all the time," he said. "Why should we think that anything is different today just because one day is hot, another day has heavy rains? Meteorologists often see those things as natural variability."
Seitter said many meteorologists also don't trust models - "because we've seen how wrong they can be in predicting weather" - and that most don't interact with other scientists beyond other meteorologists.
Seitter said many meteorologists also don't trust models - "because we've seen how wrong they can be in predicting weather" - and that most don't interact with other scientists beyond other meteorologists.
What do you think? Please post a comment below.
3 comments:
Can they support their theories with scientific evidence? Theres just too much evidence to say that theres no global warming.
I think either global warming is occurring or even if it isn't, its best to act as though it is. It would be better to err in that direction than in the other direction.
The thing that always bugs me is when people look at every snow storm or cold snap or warm spell or other extremely local phenomenon and say, "See, there's proof!" (of whatever they happen to believe)
I think that whether global warming is occurring or not, the proof is going to require analyzing extremely long term records. Maybe we can't wait for proof. Maybe we have to act on the hypothesis. I don't think that is necessarily bad. (After all, we act on the "hypothesis" that the sun will rise tomorrow all the time; we don't wait until there is "proof" before we start trying to make sure we have clean clothes to wear and enough gas in the car to get to work, enough money in the checking acct to pay the bills, enough food in the house to make breakfast, etc., etc.)
It bugs me no end when people are even right about something but they try to use bad or insufficient or completely irrelevant "evidence" to prove it.
This whole "Global Warming" agenda is about making you pay more for less.
It is not about saving the Earth; it is about SOAKING YOU FOR MORE MONEY!
IPCC Scientists Caught Producing False Data To Push Global Warming
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/opinion/main.jhtml?xml=/opinion/2008/11/16/do1610.xml
There are dozens of examples, I can provide the links if needed.
Take, for example:
Global warning: We are actually heading towards a new Ice Age, claim scientists
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-1085359/Global-warning-We-actually-heading-new-Ice-Age-claim-scientists.html
To cover for this inconvenient fact, we will now be replacing "climate change" with the former "global warming"...since the end result is the same: TAX YOU AND ME!
Look at what the Gov't does now with the money they "don't" have, and they now want to tax the air you breathe? I think not.
If Gov's and corporations of the world cared about the planet, all plastics would be ceased in production, the Depleted Uranium use in Iraq would end, the Nuke power plants would close, the Rainforests would cease to be destroyed, and on and on it goes.
The technology is there to do it all- cleanly and cost-effectively, yet the technology is kept from the hoi polloi so they have to pay the high heating and gas bills.
The hypocrisy and lack of standards is alarming, to say the least.
Increasing Arctic Ice Is What We Don't Hear
http://www.eworldvu.com/imported-data/2008/10/20/increasing-arctic-ice-is-what-we-dont-hear.html
Having said all that, I am not a meteorologist, nor a scientist. I don't pretend to know the answer, but I don't think taxing us is going to help the situation.
I hope I am not too brash or bold for this comment, I understand if you want to delete me.
Post a Comment