Weather Channel founder John Coleman - Global Warming a Global Scam

[Rainsford]

Originally posted by: marincounty
This guy is an arrogant ass.
"Any person who spends a decade at a university obtaining a PHD in Meteorology and become a research scientist, more likely than not, becomes a part of that single minded culture. They all look askance at the rest of us, certain of their superiority. They respect government and disrespect business, particularly big business. They are environmentalists above all else. "

Sounds like somebody has preconceived notions of what PHD meterologists think and do.
Kind of what he is accusing others of doing.

"I have learned since the Ice Age is coming scare in the 1970's to always be a skeptic about research. In the case of global warming, I didn't accept media accounts. Instead I read dozens of the scientific papers. I have talked with numerous scientists. I have studied. I have thought about it. I know I am correct when I assure you there is no run away climate change. The impact of humans on climate is not catastrophic. Our planet is not in peril. It is all a scam, the result of bad science."

Anyone that says "I know I am correct..." is most likely incorrect, and they are definitely an arrogant SOB. So are we to believe this San Diego weatherman, or the many PHD scientists that say otherwise?

It's interesting how guys like this are almost always presented as real scientists coming out and admitting that "their group" is wrong about something, yet they almost always use the same rhetoric as the Bill O'Reilly types. Now either that's a remarkable coincidence, Bill O'Reilly knows what he's talking about, or THESE types of guys are full of shit. I know which one I think is most likely.

Seriously, if there were serious scientists coming out and saying "there is no man-made global warming" in the same manner as the serious science types who DO say there is man-made global warming, I'd listen. But there aren't. There are folks who CLAIM to be serious science types, but they almost always SOUND like the asshole-on-TV types. So far as I can tell, there are three groups in this debate. The serious science folks who support the idea of man-made global warming, the Al Gore types who support man-made global warming without understanding what they are talking about, and the opposition to that type who deny man-made global warming without knowing what they are talking about. I figure those last two groups cancel out, which means there is really only one group of people worth listening to.

 

[umbrella39]

I like this quote early on "This "debate" is as open as the "debate" on evolution". Sig worthy for sure. The OP should really try and find out why he hates the planet so much 😀

 

[IGBT]

..it's the perfect grift. all the eco-theists are walking around with their wallets open. Get in on the gag and make a ton of money like algore.

 

[marincounty]

Originally posted by: IGBT
..it's the perfect grift. all the eco-theists are walking around with their wallets open. Get in on the gag and make a ton of money like algore.

Uh, This guy started the weather channel and made millions I assume.
And the military-industrial scam is much more profitable and has been for many years.

 

[IGBT]

Originally posted by: marincounty

Originally posted by: IGBT
..it's the perfect grift. all the eco-theists are walking around with their wallets open. Get in on the gag and make a ton of money like algore.

Uh, This guy started the weather channel and made millions I assume.
And the military-industrial scam is much more profitable and has been for many years.

..so now we have another one and this time it's also a theism with algore the pope.

 

[WHAMPOM]

Originally posted by: hellokeith
Link to news story

Link to John's blog at KUSI San Diego

"Although Coleman states that he has read dozens of scientific papers, talked with numerous scientists and has a meterological background still his statement carries no more than sheer opinionated weight. Coleman says that our planet is not in peril. The truth of the matter is that the debate on global warming remains open."

I find it refreshing that this journalist would not softball John's opinion, and yet he states the honest truth that Global Warming is still open for debate. Even after Al "the debate is over" oscar-winner nobel peace prize Gore's movies and interviews and wildly successful carbon credit business, the honest truth is that Global Warming is still debateable..

The founder of the Weather Channel doesn't even think warming exists. How much more pointed can you get than that?

Geeezzz! I would put him right in the "don't upset my biased opinions with fact" category.

 

[IGBT]

Originally posted by: WHAMPOM

Originally posted by: hellokeith
Link to news story

Link to John's blog at KUSI San Diego

"Although Coleman states that he has read dozens of scientific papers, talked with numerous scientists and has a meterological background still his statement carries no more than sheer opinionated weight. Coleman says that our planet is not in peril. The truth of the matter is that the debate on global warming remains open."

I find it refreshing that this journalist would not softball John's opinion, and yet he states the honest truth that Global Warming is still open for debate. Even after Al "the debate is over" oscar-winner nobel peace prize Gore's movies and interviews and wildly successful carbon credit business, the honest truth is that Global Warming is still debateable..

The founder of the Weather Channel doesn't even think warming exists. How much more pointed can you get than that?

Geeezzz! I would put him right in the "don't upset my biased opinions with fact" category.

..ya. smoke,mirrors and silly putty facts.

 

[Moonbeam]

Originally posted by: blackangst1

Originally posted by: Moonbeam
I believe that if all the humans on earth just concentrated very hard and had loving thoughts global warming could be halted.

Actually I think if humans werent filled with such self hate temps would decrease.

I see you're like me. You see one crack-pot theory and you feel the urge to propose your own.

 

[TheNewbie]

Originally posted by: miketheidiot

Originally posted by: Pabster

Originally posted by: miketheidiot
thats a high-caliber link.

Jeez, do liberals have to associate everything with guns? :laugh:

You're right, the link may be too "high caliber" for some to understand.

wtf? There isn't anything in the link, what is there to understand?

That's right. That link is a fukcing joke. It's as well articulated and elaborated as any normal 8 year old can write.

 

[CPA]

The same people bashing this guy are the same people who were steeping praise on the Weather Channel anchor who went on a global warming is real tirade earlier this year. lol.

 

[umbrella39]

Originally posted by: CPA
The same people bashing this guy are the same people who were steeping praise on the Weather Channel anchor who went on a global warming is real tirade earlier this year. lol.

O RLY?

 

[BeauJangles]

Originally posted by: Rainsford
It's interesting how guys like this are almost always presented as real scientists coming out and admitting that "their group" is wrong about something, yet they almost always use the same rhetoric as the Bill O'Reilly types. Now either that's a remarkable coincidence, Bill O'Reilly knows what he's talking about, or THESE types of guys are full of shit. I know which one I think is most likely.

Seriously, if there were serious scientists coming out and saying "there is no man-made global warming" in the same manner as the serious science types who DO say there is man-made global warming, I'd listen. But there aren't. There are folks who CLAIM to be serious science types, but they almost always SOUND like the asshole-on-TV types. So far as I can tell, there are three groups in this debate. The serious science folks who support the idea of man-made global warming, the Al Gore types who support man-made global warming without understanding what they are talking about, and the opposition to that type who deny man-made global warming without knowing what they are talking about. I figure those last two groups cancel out, which means there is really only one group of people worth listening to.

Unfortunately, it is becoming increasingly popular to deny scientific claims. There are people who have dedicated their whole lives to studying global warming, yet a large portion of the general population thinks they know better. This process repeats itself across countless debates and, to me, seems to be on the rise.

 

[AnitaPeterson]

Originally posted by: sirjonk


This "debate" is as open as the "debate" on evolution.

[Quake3 voice]PERFECT!!![/Quake3 voice]

How many times more do I have to say it: the correct term is not "global warming", it's "climate change"!

OP continues to troll on the subject...

 

[shadow9d9]

Originally posted by: hellokeith
Link to news story

Link to John's blog at KUSI San Diego

"Although Coleman states that he has read dozens of scientific papers, talked with numerous scientists and has a meterological background still his statement carries no more than sheer opinionated weight. Coleman says that our planet is not in peril. The truth of the matter is that the debate on global warming remains open."

I find it refreshing that this journalist would not softball John's opinion, and yet he states the honest truth that Global Warming is still open for debate. Even after Al "the debate is over" oscar-winner nobel peace prize Gore's movies and interviews and wildly successful carbon credit business, the honest truth is that Global Warming is still debateable..

The founder of the Weather Channel doesn't even think warming exists. How much more pointed can you get than that?

You are right.. this guy must hold the answers... No one else could be right... good thread!

 

[Throckmorton]

http://www.weather.com/encyclopedia/global/index.html

More than a century's worth of detailed climate observations shows a sharp increase in both carbon dioxide and temperature. These observations, together with computer model simulations and historical climate reconstructions from ice cores, ocean sediments and tree rings all provide strong evidence that the majority of the warming over the past century is a result of human activities. This is also the conclusion drawn, nearly unanimously, by climate scientists. Any meaningful debate on the topic amongst climate experts is over.

 

[Throckmorton]

By the way, a meteorologist is not a climatologist.

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

Originally posted by: Rainsford
So far as I can tell, there are three groups in this debate. The serious science folks who support the idea of man-made global warming, the Al Gore types who support man-made global warming without understanding what they are talking about, and the opposition to that type who deny man-made global warming without knowing what they are talking about. I figure those last two groups cancel out, which means there is really only one group of people worth listening to.

WTF...what about the 4th group...those serious science folk who think that the jury's still out on MMGW? Your myopic world view amazes me. You should make an honest attempt to actually research the topic and the reason why many scientists are increasingly siding with this 4th 'politically incorrect' viewpoint...but this assumes that you really want to learn and understand something that's outside your world that can't see or even imagine that the 4th group exists.

You might start with googling the CLOUD experiment that CERN is conducting and then research the background on why they are doing this study and then research those studies.

Then you MAY then see (assuming that you're mind isn't already made up and that you're capable of thinking objectively regarding this subject), that there's very strong evidence that solar variability may be directly linked to climate variability through a chain process that involves the solar wind, cosmic rays and clouds. As you can see for yourself, the science is currently underway to study this theory and we should know a lot more in a couple years.

The fact of the matter is that the science is far from settled on this subject. You might want to think about this for a couple seconds and reaccess your viewpoint.

 

[piasabird]

The climate is always changing.

Duhhhh!!!!!

Do you think you can make the climate change the way you want it to?

 

[Throckmorton]

Originally posted by: piasabird
The climate is always changing.

Duhhhh!!!!!

Do you think you can make the climate change the way you want it to?

Yes you can, by increasing the level of CO2 in the atmosphere by 50%. Why are people still parroting "climate change always happens"? Do you believe that climatologists don't know that climate change happens naturally?

 

[Throckmorton]

Originally posted by: Doc Savage Fan

Originally posted by: Rainsford
So far as I can tell, there are three groups in this debate. The serious science folks who support the idea of man-made global warming, the Al Gore types who support man-made global warming without understanding what they are talking about, and the opposition to that type who deny man-made global warming without knowing what they are talking about. I figure those last two groups cancel out, which means there is really only one group of people worth listening to.

The fact of the matter is that the science is far from settled on this subject. You might want to think about this for a couple seconds and reaccess your viewpoint.

You're confusing politics with science. I'm not sure why it is you believe the sun has steadily gotten brighter since the start of the industrial revolution, causing a temperature increase correlated exactly with atmospheric CO2.. The only explanation is politics.

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

Originally posted by: Throckmorton

Originally posted by: Doc Savage Fan

Originally posted by: Rainsford
So far as I can tell, there are three groups in this debate. The serious science folks who support the idea of man-made global warming, the Al Gore types who support man-made global warming without understanding what they are talking about, and the opposition to that type who deny man-made global warming without knowing what they are talking about. I figure those last two groups cancel out, which means there is really only one group of people worth listening to.

The fact of the matter is that the science is far from settled on this subject. You might want to think about this for a couple seconds and reaccess your viewpoint.

You're confusing politics with science. I'm not sure why it is you believe the sun has steadily gotten brighter since the start of the industrial revolution, causing a temperature increase correlated exactly with atmospheric CO2.. The only explanation is politics.

Please don't put words into my mouth. I gave you (or anyone that's truly interested) a starting point to research current scientific theory on the subject. I'm not going to spoon-feed people like you or anyone else who love to shout their opinions while making zero effort to educate themselves on the subject matter.

If you want to believe that my viewpoint is politically motivated...go for it...continue living in your little world of willful closed minded ignorance. On the other hand, you could choose to actually do a little research and find out the facts for yourself. At that time, I would be more than happy to discuss the results of your investigation along with your opinions. Until then, please keep your mouth closed and stop embarrassing yourself.

 

[dahunan]

Alternative site for your weather http://www.nws.noaa.gov/

 

[Kur]

I'm all for keeping the "global warming" thing going on, renewable energy is on the move, cleaner cars, air, builds, etc...

 

[fskimospy]

Originally posted by: Doc Savage Fan

Please don't put words into my mouth. I gave you (or anyone that's truly interested) a starting point to research current scientific theory on the subject. I'm not going to spoon-feed people like you or anyone else who love to shout their opinions while making zero effort to educate themselves on the subject matter.

If you want to believe that my viewpoint is politically motivated...go for it...continue living in your little world of willful closed minded ignorance. On the other hand, you could choose to actually do a little research and find out the facts for yourself. At that time, I would be more than happy to discuss the results of your investigation along with your opinions. Until then, please keep your mouth closed and stop embarrassing yourself.

Solar variation theory does not account for the change in temperatures since 1980. Even the people who are proponents of solar variation theory admit that the sun's effects are at best a small contributor to the amount of warming we have seen in the last 20 years. The original study that gave this theory any play at all in the media was found to have errors in calculation.

 

[Doc Savage Fan]

Originally posted by: eskimospy

Originally posted by: Doc Savage Fan

Please don't put words into my mouth. I gave you (or anyone that's truly interested) a starting point to research current scientific theory on the subject. I'm not going to spoon-feed people like you or anyone else who love to shout their opinions while making zero effort to educate themselves on the subject matter.

If you want to believe that my viewpoint is politically motivated...go for it...continue living in your little world of willful closed minded ignorance. On the other hand, you could choose to actually do a little research and find out the facts for yourself. At that time, I would be more than happy to discuss the results of your investigation along with your opinions. Until then, please keep your mouth closed and stop embarrassing yourself.

Solar variation theory does not account for the change in temperatures since 1980. Even the people who are proponents of solar variation theory admit that the sun's effects are at best a small contributor to the amount of warming we have seen in the last 20 years. The original study that gave this theory any play at all in the media was found to have errors in calculation.

The jury's still out...I've seen the info you're referring to; however, the science is ongoing and there continues to be mounting evidence that GCR is a significant forcing factor. You might want to peruse this Phenomenological solar signature in 400 years of reconstructed Northern Hemisphere temperature record (2006) - N. Scafetta and B. J. West. There are many other studies on this subject with more coming...but this is a good place to start.

Then you should hop over to RealClimate (<--questionable objectivity but we need to look at dissenting opinion) to get their take on the above study (warning...this will take a while as you need to read all the criticisms, understand the gist of the critisicms and then read all of Scafetta's responses). Personally, I thought Scafetta did an excellent job of defending his paper.

The reason I post this is because it gives you a flavor for both sides of the debate and I thought you might be interested. The science is far from settled....however, we should have a much better idea of the mechanics of GCR in the next few years and get a lot closer to the truth of the matter.

Edit: Added RealClimate Link
Edit: Link to complete Scafetta and West study Phenomenological solar signature in 400 years of reconstructed Northern Hemisphere temperature record