Skip to comments.WEATHER CHANNEL ABSURDITY
Posted on 01/19/2007 8:09:00 AM PST by NotchJohnson
WEATHER CHANNEL ABSURDITY
Perhaps the most bizarre story of the week comes from Weather Channel Meteobabe Heidi Cullen. Apparently she hosts a show called "The Climate Code."
Let's all bask for a moment in the extremely clever play on "The DaVinci Code" popularity.
OK .. That's enough. Back to Hysterical Heidi. Cullen wants the American Meteorological Society (AMS), the group that certifies TV weathermen, to decertify any weatherman who dares to question the "fact" that man is causing catastrophic global climate change.
Note, please, that the phrase "Global warming" is no longer really in vogue. After all ... ice just destroyed much of California's citrus crop. So the word now is "climate change."
Here's what Cullen had to say on her blog:
"If a meteorologist can't speak to the fundamental science of climate change, then maybe the AMS shouldn't give them a Seal of Approval. Clearly, the AMS doesn't agree that global warming can be blamed on cyclical weather patterns. It's like allowing a meteorologist to go on-air and say that hurricanes rotate clockwise and tsunamis are caused by the weather. It's not a political statement...it's just an incorrect statement."
To Cullen the "fundamental science of climate change" is that global warming is being caused by man. She completely discounts cyclical weather patterns which have been proven by science. The earth has been this warm in the past .. warmer .. many times. Cullen doesn't explain why. By the way ... it has been pointed out that hurricanes do rotate clockwise in the southern hemisphere -- but why be picky.
Here's another blog you might be interested in. The Weather Blog. This is from AMC certified Meteorologist James Spann. He says that he does not know of a single TV Meteorologist who buys into the man-made global warming hype. There are some excellent comments posted to Spann's blog. A good read.
Don't you just love a good juicy controversy?
Years back, husband and I noticed a trend on The Weather Channel. All of the women are constantly rotating in and out of pregnancy. I wonder if it is somehow a job requirement.
They have their opinion and no amount of fact will change it.
The Weather Channel software is coming off my computer tonight. The Weather Channel link is coming off my favorites tonight. I never tuned into the cable channel, so no need for a change there.
Buh Bye, Weather Channel.
On my satellite provider the Weather channel is one up from Fox, so I flip up once and a while to see what's going on. I think over the last 6 months I've heard several of their hosts make some comment on global warming.
Always fascinating to watch someone trained in weather prediction (the closest profession we have to alchemy) and not scientific theory get the weather wrong more often than right, and make absurd scientific predictions of doom and gloom about the future.
Apparently a senior producer for CNN was hired away to be the head honcho at the Weather Channel a few years ago. Her whole policy is based on developing and featuring the kind of opinionated personalities as they had at CNN, like Cafferty, or MSNBC's Olberman. I mean, look how well that's worked for those two networks!
I use this site:
Just put in your zip code and bookmark the page. I've found it to be far more accurate for my area than anything from the weather channel, and it has a nice real-time radar. It's a bit heavy on the ads, but I use FireFox so it's tolerable
Ha, you noticed that too. I think that they could spin to Discovery Health while giving birth, then Oxygen for afters. Then back to the Weather Channel.
a great weather site - easy to customize - the only one I use:
Cantori is the reason that I still watch TWC, but I have a feeling that his days may be numbered (if he does not tow the liberal lie)
She has a PHd in Global warming, really.
Well, they gotta do something when they are forced inside because of climate changes.
These are the same folks that bring us the doomsday show "It could happen tomorrow" Gimme a break.
Heck they don't even get the weather right a couple of day out. Then they think they know it all on global warming. Right!
The radar lags by about five minutes; to get full animated radar coverage of the daylight hours you must subscribe.
I don't watch the Weather Channel much anymore (the wife does for the locals), but Cantori always seemed to be one of the straight up ones. I guess that's still the case; probably more so based on how their programming has evolved.
Maybe they finally found a job that offers sufficient health care that they can kick 'em out now. Same thing with the FOX babes ... babies every year for two or three years.
I third the recommendation. Much prefer the user-friendlier format of wunderground to TWC, even disregarding the global warming "enforcers" who've evidently taken over at TWC.
$5.00 for a year with NO ads. Well worth the cost. They also have people with home weather stations sending feeds to them, so you can see real time local weather.
"All of the women are constantly rotating in and out of pregnancy. I wonder if it is somehow a job requirement."
What do you think all those meteorologists do during the commercial breaks? Those people breed like rabbits.
"So as you can see Jim, we have Low pressure coming up from the southeast, and because of selfish Americans driving SUVs which cause Global Warming, we have windy conditions across the great plains....."
Great visual! LOL
This mental midget is both ignorant and a dissimulating twit.
Hurricanes, typhoons, same thing, different places. In the Southern Hemisphere they do rotate clockwise.
Selective fear mongering based on an exaggerated sense of self-worth. They have no clue how irrelevant and silly they come across.
The science of global warming? Oh boy.
I hope her fans watch other real-world channels.
Yes! I've never watched "It Could Happen Tomorrow", I've only briefly seen previews before I hit the button to another channel. I've often wondered how badly that show must scare small children. Like we don't have enough to worry about!
Alexandra Steele always gives me the creeps. When I first saw her, I thought she was kinda 'hot' so to speak. But it didn't take long to realize that everything about her was fake and that she really didn't belong on the Weather Channel.
Mankind has been ACCURATELY recording weather for what, 200 years? And still, the Al Gore fan club members still INSIST that global warming is a) happening and b) mankind's fault. The simple fact that the geographic record documents countless shifts in weather patterns and climate over thousands of years is an inconvenient reality to Steele and her ilk.
Just my humble opinion, of course.
Why am I not surprised?
Forty years ago, that was a certain track for jobs in fast food or shoe sales.
As I read this thread, Rush Limbaugh is blasting her into the nether regions of the stratosphere. "There's no science here, it's pure politics", says Limbaugh.
The scientific method dictates that one gather all information from any experiment before forming so much as a theory. Even before forming a hypothesis, one must get results from at least two observable facts.
This woman is whacked.
Also good and NO ADS:
Heidi, you ignorant sl...
it is Dr. Cullen...
Well what'd you expect? Isn't TWC part of the CNN empire?
The Weather Channel has gone to hell over the pasy few years. it wouldbe a greattime for a competing
Weather Channel. The damn weekend show looks like the set from the view - Syrupy crap posing as realistic discussion.
I agree. Jim Cantori is the best one left.
We have a local meteorologist by the name of Kevin Williams who doesn't buy into the man-made climate change thing at all. Here's a quote from him:
We should be thankful for the greenhouse effect, he says. Without it, our planet would be a lifeless rock.
In southern New Mexico we don't have any reason to watch a weather channel so we don't get involved in really controversial and important situations like this. We just look outside and we can see the weather if there is any - even miles away. Cuts down on the "situations" we have to deal with.
The leftist agenda is now to claim that every uncomfortable instance of weather is the fault of the opposition.
Somebody needs to quickly spell out and publish what this form of thought control means. Crichton's "State of Fear" was a start.
For $5.00 a year the site is ad free. I have been a member for a couple of years.
The measure of "climate change" depends entirely on the quality and timespan over which observations are made. It's easy to make assertions about climate that are unfounded simply because we have no reasonable record of the past, or because we are extrapolating with large errors that get larger with the extrapolation (into the past or present).
The biggest flaw in global warming is that everyone who is a proponent of this is assuming that these pollutants are inert and that nothing happens to them chemically to break them down. They couldn't be more wrong.
IMO volcanic eruptions have been the major cause of chemical-agent induced change in (at least) the last million years: ash and sulpheric compounds.