More than a quarter of the weathercasters in the survey agreed with the statement, "Global warming is a scam," the researchers found.
 |
||
| · join · view topics · view or post blog · bookmark · post new topic · subscribe · | ||
global warming ping
“Climatologists, who study weather patterns over time, almost universally endorse the view that the earth is warming and that humans have contributed to climate change.”
That is pure BS and destroys his main argument.
I’m surprised that the NYT can calmly discuss the debate without getting hysterical about jailing the ‘deniers’.
” ... Climatologists, who study weather patterns over time, almost universally endorse the view that the earth is warming and that humans have contributed to climate change. Meteorologists, who predict short-term weather patterns, are not so sure. .. “
Poppycock - the difference is between who is taking money via grants and subsidizing career advancement, and who is a regular working guy with a salary! IMHO
The split between climate scientists and meteorologists is gaining attention in political and academic circles because polls show that public skepticism about global warming is increasing, and weather forecasters — especially television forecasters — dominate communications channels to the public”
Man that must be frustrating as all get out to the warming cheerleaders. It seems that bad science and the print media ain’t what it used to be. And now we’ve got those pesky meteorologists to deal with. How’s a scammer gonna catch a break?
Bastardi has been right on the money for years now.
who uses the weatherman any more? it is straight to the NOAA site where THEY get the same information.
The tv stations should just bring back the bikini weather girl in the clear raincoat and regain their credibility (/s)
Why is climatology a “science” and meteorology not? Meteorology makes predictions that are confirmed or falsified. Climatology makes predictions that are forgotten or obsolete before they can be verified. Meteorology is empirical, but climatology is speculative.
Another case of trying to win the word game by calling the ones that the authors agree with scientists but denying that description to the ones that the authors disagree with.
...pitting environmentalists against industry and coal-state Democrats against coastal liberals.
More than a quarter of the weathercasters in the survey agreed with the statement, "Global warming is a scam," the researchers found.
|
||
| · join · view topics · view or post blog · bookmark · post new topic · subscribe · | ||
...and rely 100% on Government funding for their livelihoods. They will be long dead before their disaster scenarios will be proven wrong by history. They are free to forecast any damn thing they choose to and they never have to live with their mistakes.
The humble TV weather man, on the other hand, only has to get the forecast right most of the time for the next day, or next week, in order to keep his job. People actually do rely on what he says, not just for picnics or golf, but for business. If he screws up, it can cost lots of money, or even lives!
The fact is, while the 'university PhDs with their big grants and billion dollar computer models keep calling it wrong season after season, (where did all the hurricanes they called for go?) the humble TV weather forecasters get it right most of the time. When they miss a big event, they are toast.
They are not perfect, but at least they are applying proven scientific principles to a mathematically 'chaotic' equation. They are not using questionable 'models' based on unproven theories and cooked historical data intentionally spiked to show a linear response that has never once been demonstrated to be accurate.
I take Joe Bustardi, the weather guy, over Michael Mann any day. Interestingly, they are both at Penn State.
The global climate models cannot be validated because they have essentially only one “run” to validate against. Daily weather models have hundreds of runs a year to validate against, and are being improved all the time, based on what is really happening.
Meteorologists know that this cannot be done with climate for at least hundreds of years, so the models only show what the modelers think they should show.