The Weather Channel Mess

[Marnie]

ABC Weatherblog

Well, well. Some

[hmh]

In my opinion, those who force their political ideology on us are now threating the livelyhood of those who refuse to tow the line. When did it become mandatory that you must believe what they tell you or else you loose your job? When did it become mandatory to bow down to their beliefs or else be publically ridiculed? Since the Weather Channel began broadcasting this person's show, I have lost alot of respect for that station. Remember 30+ years ago when the government forbid the sale of leaded gasoline and forced automakers to build cars with catalytic converters? It was because of the fear of another ice age. Now we have switched 180 degrees for what? Because now we have global warming. And what is this that I hear? Now several states are suing to control the amount of carbon dioxide that is released into the air. Why? According to the lawsuit, BECAUSE THE CATALYTIC CONVERTERS ARE CAUSING GLOBAL WARMING! So here we are again messing around with something we have no clue about what is happening, all because it is a politically charged, touchy-feally situation where again we are being force fed a bunch of garbage by those who really have no clue why things are happening the way they are. Can industrial waste cause problems? Of course. Should something be done about it? Of course. But now it's gotten to the point that we, in America, must take responsibility for ALL the world's pollution, even though throughout the world there are environmental situations that are worse than that of Love Canal. But those countries are not being forced to change. There are climatic cycles that we are now learning about and beginning to understand, (also according to some astronomers the sun's temperature is increasing) and that throughout the geological history of this planet there have been some pretty significant climatiological changes that have affected the surface. So I will not jump on no bandwagon nor will I be intimidated by some political ideological dogma that is forcing their agenda on me.

Also, do these same individuals realize that in geological history, the earth's magnetic poles have shifted? How will they react to that? Too many SUV's on the roads today?

[forrestkc]

ABC Weatherblog

In fact, I encourage you to listen to WeatherBrains episode number 12, featuring Alabama State Climatologist John Christy, and WeatherBrains episode number 17, featuring Dr. William Gray of Colorado State University, one of the most brilliant minds in our science.

WeatherBrains, by the way, is our weekly 30 minute netcast.

I have nothing against

[hmh]

Actually, Dr. Gray is one of many scientists who question the validity of global warming. Several at the Hurricane Center and NWS question global warming. If global warming is such an issue, why not go after such countries as China, India, Russia, Columbia, and Peru, just to name a few? Instead it is the US who bears the brunt of the UN and other international agencies to combat global warming. We have done far more to clean up the environment than most of the world has combined.

[forrestkc]

Actually, Dr. Gray is one of many scientists who question the validity of global warming. Several at the Hurricane Center and NWS question global warming. If global warming is such an issue, why not go after such countries as China, India, Russia, Columbia, and Peru, just to name a few? Instead it is the US who bears the brunt of the UN and other international agencies to combat global warming. We have done far more to clean up the environment than most of the world has combined.

Those at the Hurricane Center do not question Anthropogenic Global Warming, they simply questioned a study that claimed to blame the latest wave of stronger hurricanes on it. Moreover, Anthropogenic Global Warming is the official position of the NWS.

The fact is, it boils down to this. You can either trust the National Academy of Sciences on matters of science like this, or you can put your trust in OP/EDs and industry funded propoganda.

[hmh]

OK, before this becomes blown up and starts getting ugly, the National Academy of Sciences has issues not only on this subject, but on others (such as evolution). The NWS is questioning the validity of global warming because of studies, including the recent increase of hurricanes (except for this past season, which was quiet). OP-EDs and industry funded issues are not part of why I question the validity of global warming studies, it's because of such figures as Al Gore who proclaimed the movie "The Day After Tomorrow" as a sign of things to come. There are scientists (people I know personally) who have point blank stated that the events as they played out in the movie is impossible. I will question each study on global warming that comes out, and when I see political dogma being inserted by the likes of Al Gore and others who are "do as I say and not as I do", that tells me it's not a science matter, but a political matter with no merit.

As far as who I believe when it comes to global warming, I will question the validity of any study, whether it's from the "prestigeous" National Academy of Science, NOAA, any university, and basically anyone.

We are in an age of hype=political agenda=MONEY.

[Marnie]

Forrest, do you actually read the things I post? And click on the links and so on? My posts are always taken from reputable sources, who in turn reference credible sources. An op/ed is fine to post, especially when they are from educated individuals who reference other sources. It really is frustrating how you put down my posts continually. It makes debate/discussion impossible.

You are still struggling with that pup tent, I see.

[forrestkc]

OK, before this becomes blown up and starts getting ugly, the National Academy of Sciences has issues not only on this subject, but on others (such as evolution). The NWS is questioning the validity of global warming because of studies, including the recent increase of hurricanes (except for this past season, which was quiet). OP-EDs and industry funded issues are not part of why I question the validity of global warming studies, it's because of such figures as Al Gore who proclaimed the movie "The Day After Tomorrow" as a sign of things to come. There are scientists (people I know personally) who have point blank stated that the events as they played out in the movie is impossible. I will question each study on global warming that comes out, and when I see political dogma being inserted by the likes of Al Gore and others who are "do as I say and not as I do", that tells me it's not a science matter, but a political matter with no merit.

As far as who I believe when it comes to global warming, I will question the validity of any study, whether it's from the "prestigeous" National Academy of Science, NOAA, any university, and basically anyone.

We are in an age of hype=political agenda=MONEY.

If you actually want to see the actual positions of NOAA and the National Weather Service on Anthropogenic Global Warming then here would be a good start:

http://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/oa/climate/climateextremes.html

It certainly beats an OP/Ed written by an Alabama weather man.

Sure there is hype in moves like The Day After Tomorrow, but no on in the scientific community claimed that the movie was even remotely possible. If anyone actually wants the actual science behind this issue, then the best place to start would be www.realclimate.org.

[forrestkc]

Forrest, do you actually read the things I post? And click on the links and so on? My posts are always taken from reputable sources, who in turn reference credible sources. An op/ed is fine to post, especially when they are from educated individuals who reference other sources. It really is frustrating how you put down my posts continually. It makes debate/discussion impossible.

You are still struggling with that pup tent, I see.

It is equally frustrating to me when people try to counter science with editorials. I get on here, and post science and data from peer reviewed sources. Then I get countered with editorials that in this case are accompanied by a couple of pod-casts.

If you want to really debate the issue on a scientific level, go dig some articles out of journals like the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, Nature, or the journal Science. Then you can get to the science without ideological opinions, propaganda, misinformation, or politics. www.realclimate.org is a great resource for this issue. It is a site ran by climatologists who distill the science on this issue removing the radical hype on one side, and the propaganda and misinformation on the other.

The fact is, I don't get on here and post articles from left wing sites or anything that could be construed as propoganda. I try to just post and address the underlining science on the issue.

[hmh]

Actually, there was alot of hype about the movie actually being a vision of the future. But instead of arguing about that and other pointless issues over global warming, then I'm going to issue a challenge to all.

1. Quit driving

2. Stop using your air conditioner in the summer

3. Stop using household chemicals

4. Don't wear any clothing that contains synthetic materials

As you can see, nearly all of the above is nearly impossible to achieve, but if we really are so concerned about this global warming issue, the the world as a whole needs to reevaluate, and not just the US.