Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Global warming activists seek to purge ‘deniers’ among local weathermen
The Daily Caller ^

Posted on 01/30/2012 8:44:03 AM PST by Sub-Driver

Global warming activists seek to purge ‘deniers’ among local weathermen By Caroline May - The Daily Caller 11:23 AM 01/30/2012 ADVERTISEMENT

Concerned that too many “deniers” are in the meteorology business, global warming activists this month launched a campaign to recruit local weathermen to hop aboard the alarmism bandwagon and expose those who are not fully convinced that the world is facing man-made doom.

The Forecast the Facts campaign — led by 350.org, the League of Conservation Voters and the Citizen Engagement Lab — is pushing for more of a focus on global warming in weather forecasts, and is highlighting the many meteorologists who do not share their beliefs.

“Our goal is nothing short of changing how the entire profession of meteorology tackles the issue of climate change,” the group explains on their website. “We’ll empower everyday people to make sure meteorologists understand that their viewers are counting on them to get this story right, and that those who continue to shirk their professional responsibility will be held accountable.”

According to the Washington Post, the reason for the campaign can be found in a 2010 George Mason University surveys, which found that 63% of television weathermen think that global warming is a product of natural causes, while 31% believe it is from human activity.

So far, the campaign has identified 55 “deniers” in the meteorologist community and are looking for more. They define “deniers” as “anyone who expressly refutes the overwhelming scientific consensus about climate change: that it is real, largely caused by humans, and already having profound impacts on our world.”

“We track the views of meteorologists through their on-air statements, blog posts, social media activity, public appearances, interviews, and interactions with viewers,” the campaign explains.

(Excerpt) Read more at dailycaller.com ...


TOPICS:
KEYWORDS: climatechange; climatechangehoax; globalwarminghoax; meterologists; weathermen

1 posted on 01/30/2012 8:44:12 AM PST by Sub-Driver
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Sub-Driver

Better idea:
If you’re NOT degreed in Climatology, you are prohibited from being a global warming activist.
If you are a degreed Climatologist, you must present a scientific basis for your position regarding man made global warming.


2 posted on 01/30/2012 8:50:05 AM PST by G Larry (We need Bare Knuckles Newt to fight this battle.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sub-Driver
scientific consensus

Oxymoron. Something is either derived scientifically, or by consensus. It can never be both.

3 posted on 01/30/2012 8:50:56 AM PST by wbill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sub-Driver

Global warming?

Get with the program!

Per several recent threads/articles, Global Cooling is back.


4 posted on 01/30/2012 8:51:12 AM PST by TomGuy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sub-Driver

One would think that making a more convincing case for human caused global warming would be preferable to destroying the careers of those who don’t agree. If 63% of a professional group that is way more educated in a field that is related to climate science (and whose livelyhoods mostly don’t depend on goverment research grants) don’t believe your theory - then either you should start doubting your theory or realize that you have done a crappy job of proving, explaining and defending it.


5 posted on 01/30/2012 8:53:42 AM PST by ghost of nixon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sub-Driver

As they identify the “deniers”, I’ll send them a bumpersticker printed with my tag-line!


6 posted on 01/30/2012 8:55:10 AM PST by Cletus.D.Yokel (Catastrophic Anthropogenic Climate Alterations - The acronym explains the science.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: wbill

It looks like the ‘consensus’ of weathermen is that global warming is bunk. Isn’t their education scientifically oriented?


7 posted on 01/30/2012 8:56:55 AM PST by chopperman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Sub-Driver

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fallen_Angels_%28science_fiction_novel%29


8 posted on 01/30/2012 8:56:55 AM PST by struggle (http://killthegovernment.wordpress.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sub-Driver

We can debate the speed of light, we can debate the mass of an electron, we can question the properties of a photon .... but Global Warming is established science, no debating allowed. < /s>


9 posted on 01/30/2012 8:57:01 AM PST by Hodar ( Who needs laws; when this FEELS so right?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sub-Driver
So far, the campaign has identified 55 “deniers” in the meteorologist community and are looking for more.

What's next? Yellow stars for the "deniers"? Labor camps?

10 posted on 01/30/2012 8:57:27 AM PST by montag813
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sub-Driver
Contrary to the scaremongers and the Al Gore ‘climate crisis’ clones, the latest data proves that the Earth has not warmed at all in the last 15 years. The numbers are what the numbers are and phony computer projections and alarmist hype won't change them.
11 posted on 01/30/2012 8:57:33 AM PST by JPG (Matters at which the foolish laugh and at whose consequences the prudent weep.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: montag813

No one expects the AGW inquisition! Our main weapons are fear and surprise, surprise and fear!

12 posted on 01/30/2012 9:00:03 AM PST by MrB (The difference between a Humanist and a Satanist - the latter knows whom he's working for)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Sub-Driver

Blasphemers must be smited!!

lol.

BTW, have they ever shown a time in history when the climate wasn’t ‘changing’??


13 posted on 01/30/2012 9:11:30 AM PST by GeronL (The Right to Life came before the Right to Pursue Happiness)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sub-Driver

My instincts tell me that Jennifer Granholm, former Michigan Governor and now a professor at UC Berkley has something to do with this.


14 posted on 01/30/2012 9:21:44 AM PST by equaviator ( "There's a (datum) plane on the horizon coming in...see it?")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sub-Driver

Control——Control-—Control


15 posted on 01/30/2012 9:24:02 AM PST by ridesthemiles
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: chopperman
Isn’t their education scientifically oriented?

Well, yeah.

Maybe I'm splitting hairs here, but what BOTH sides have is a "Consensus of Scientists". In other words, and in your example, "A bunch of guys with Meteorological backgrounds agreed that Man-Made Global Warming is crap".

If it was "Scientific", then it would be "A bunch of guys (doesn't matter who, scientific experiments are completely repeatable) formed a hypothesis (GW is crap, the Earth is getting colder not warmer), repeatedly tested the hypothesis (they looked at thermometers and wrote down the temps for a couple of decades), and the end discovery (Earth is cooling, not warming) supported their original theory."

IMHO, words mean things. "Science" is one thing. "Consensus of Scientists" is another.

"Scientific Consensus" is gobbledgook term that tries to lend credibility to a con by silencing critics. It's no different than NBCCBSABCCNN commentators shouting "Everyone knows that Obama will win in 2012".

16 posted on 01/30/2012 9:27:50 AM PST by wbill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: MrB; dfwgator
No one expects the inquisition!

"Cardinal Gore, fetch the COMFY CHAIR"!

17 posted on 01/30/2012 9:28:11 AM PST by DCBryan1 (Id rather have a man who wrecked his marriage as POTUS than a man who wrecked his country!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: montag813

“What’s next? Yellow stars for the “deniers”? Labor camps?”

I think the “more-progressive” of the lefties already have this figured out: re-education camps would be their desired next step.

As an initial step, maybe they’ll just out-source recalcitrant weathermen to North Korea - those guys have got re-education business down pat.


18 posted on 01/30/2012 9:30:10 AM PST by Stosh
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: TomGuy
At some point I predict the term morphs into "climate disruption."
19 posted on 01/30/2012 9:30:32 AM PST by GSWarrior (Click HERE to activate this tagline.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: wbill

The meterologists say its a bunch of crap by a margin of two to one. This is now documented. I have yet to see the document that verifies scientists believe in the crap 9 to 1 as claimed.


20 posted on 01/30/2012 10:03:34 AM PST by chopperman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: Sub-Driver

Good luck with that. Actual TV meteorologists (as opposed to eye candy weather girls and guys) are close to 100% “deniers”. So they want to force replacement of people who actually understand weather and know the difference between a Noreaster and an Alberta Clipper with Al Gore acolyte know nothings.


21 posted on 01/30/2012 10:17:17 AM PST by katana (Just my opinions)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: TenthAmendmentChampion; SolitaryMan; Dr. Bogus Pachysandra; grey_whiskers; ApplegateRanch; ...
 


Beam me to Planet Gore !

22 posted on 01/30/2012 10:31:41 AM PST by steelyourfaith (If it's "green" ... it's crap !!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: chopperman
yup.

And, not that my opinion is any more valuable, but I think that it's crap, too.

My local (very experienced) weatherman can't reliably predict the high temp in my hometown tomorrow. I think it's incredibly arrogant for anyone to assume that they can predict what the global temperature will be 100 years from now to within a tenth of a degree.

Does the topic still need to be studied? I think so; there good information to be found there. But we don't need to base global economic policy on a completely untestable hypothesis. We can get just as accurate info from observing tea leaves or having a UN witch doctor roll and read chicken bones.

23 posted on 01/30/2012 10:55:00 AM PST by wbill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: GSWarrior
At some point I predict the term morphs into "climate disruption." Makes as much sense as anything.

I predict that the next global boogeyman is going to be "Lack of Fresh Water". I'm already seeing that meme show up in commercials and news reports.

24 posted on 01/30/2012 10:58:01 AM PST by wbill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 19 | View Replies]

To: Sub-Driver
Sigh. I want to to see an article titled:

Intelligent people seek to purge ‘idiots’ among local writers

Not likely, but I can always dream.

25 posted on 01/30/2012 11:29:40 AM PST by ken in texas
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Sub-Driver
The weather? Mostly dry tomorrow with cloudy spells and high winds forecast for the evening as a low-pressure front moves through the region, bringing perhaps a fifty percent chance of light precipitation. Also, fat capitalists and their right wing cronies will end all life on earth. Coming up? Sports!
26 posted on 01/31/2012 12:08:14 AM PST by golux
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson