Think I’m kidding? Read the following from the Senate Committee on Environment & Public Works blog: ‘The Weather Channel’s (TWC) Heidi Cullen, who hosts the weekly global warming program ‘The Climate Code,’ is advocating that the American Meteorological Society (AMS) revoke their ‘Seal of Approval’ for any television weatherman who expresses skepticism that human activity is creating a climate catastrophe."
Here’s what Cullen frighteningly wrote on December 21 at The Weather Channel’s blog (emphasis mine throughout):
In an interesting follow-up blog on the reason for this all too common global warming contrarianism within the broadcast meteorology community, journalist Andrew Freedman suggests local TV meteorologist may want to look to the American Meteorological Society for guidance. Freedman goes on to point out that the AMS has in fact, issued a statement on climate change that reads:
"There is convincing evidence that since the industrial revolution, human activities, resulting in increasing concentrations of greenhouse gases and other trace constituents in the atmosphere, have become a major agent of climate change."
I'd like to take that suggestion a step further. If a meteorologist has an AMS Seal of Approval, which is used to confer legitimacy to TV meteorologists, then meteorologists have a responsibility to truly educate themselves on the science of global warming. (One good resource if you don't have a lot of time is the Pew Center's Climate Change 101.)
Meteorologists are among the few people trained in the sciences who are permitted regular access to our living rooms. And in that sense, they owe it to their audience to distinguish between solid, peer-reviewed science and junk political controversy. 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.
Here’s a bio on Cullen posted at The Weather Channel’s website:
Dr. Heidi Cullen is the climate expert at The Weather Channel® and host of the program The Climate Code with Dr. Heidi Cullen. Since the program’s launch in October, Dr. Cullen has interviewed leading scientists and environmentalists including Ted Turner, Virgin-founder and Entrepreneur Sir Richard Branson, and Professor Jeff Sachs, director of the Earth Institute at Columbia. Features have included a tour through an “Eco-Manor” home, a “Green Makeover” house project, and a close-up of Dartmouth students who crossed the country in the “Big Green Bus” fueled by waste vegetable oil from fast food restaurants.
Since joining The Weather Channel in 2003, she has had the key responsibility of adding explanation, depth, and perspective to climate stories for The Weather Channel network and other platforms. Dr. Cullen, a scientist of international standing in climate research, has helped build the climate program at The Weather Channel and has strengthened the network’s relationships within the scientific community. In addition to her weekly program, Dr. Cullen appears on the air frequently, providing updates on current climate-related topics and as commentator on the network’s long-form environmental series, Forecast Earth. In 2004, she went to Alaska to interview residents for a special report called “Alaska Meltdown” which investigated the effects of global warming already in evidence in Alaska. In addition, Dr. Cullen oversees the content of the TWC broadband channel – One Degree -- devoted to topics that deal with the climate and environment.
Isn’t that wonderful? The person largely responsible for content at The Weather Channel is such a strong proponent of global warming theory that she actually wants meteorologists that are skeptical about this junk science to not be approved by the AMS.
Interesting line in the sand, dontcha think?
—Noel Sheppard is the Associate Editor of NewsBusters. Follow him at Facebook and Twitter.
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
Nonsense Nole, we will always
January 18, 2007 - 22:40 ET by JABNonsense Nole, we will always need you, between you and Mark (as our keepers) we manage to keep it some what straight around here :-)
BTW, thanks for your entertaining and informative posts, I am sure I can speak for the majority here that say's "we look forward to your next submittion & keep up the good work".
Sincerely, JAB
"Too bad Ignorance isn't painful to the Ignorant"
The Communist weather Dr. . .
January 18, 2007 - 15:51 ET by TheTruthThere shall be no consenting decree of ‘solar warming’. . . All past history of climate events recorded or researched did not occur and will be disregarded. All science research into past dramatic climate events shall cease and desist. All research and recorded events of solar fluctuation did not occur and shall be disregarded. All research and recorded events of simultaneous solar warming on Mars did not occur and will be disregarded. All research and recorded events of planet Earth cycling from tropical paradise to an ice age and back again many times over the past millions of years did not occur and will be disregarded. Failure to follow ‘THE ORDERS’ and not ignore all Science that does not maintain that evil Americans and their SUV’s are the cause of ‘solar warming’ will result in severe penalties and a loss of all credentials.
A few questions for the good Dr. and so called ‘Scientist’ and weather expert. . .
1) Exactly when did Science become a one sided opinion?
2) Exactly why is the worlds biggest polluter allowed to sign Kyoto but is completely free of all aspects of the Kyoto protocol and its wealth transfer scheme, is it because they are Communists?
3) Al Gore in a speech recently stated “cigarette smokers are the major contributing factor of global warming” do you agree?
4) This is America right, and not the Soviet Union fifty years ago? Right?
5) Are you a LIBERAL?
3) Al Gore in a speech rece
January 18, 2007 - 16:22 ET by DontFeedTheTrolls3) Al Gore in a speech recently stated “cigarette smokers are the major contributing factor of global warming”
Hmmm, so Al Gore blames Barack Osama for global warming. Good stuff.
DSG
The complaint from the Libera
January 18, 2007 - 18:00 ET by mattmThe complaint from the Liberal Scientific elite is that religious dogma is an impediment to scientific discovery and knowledge. Yet, despite the well-know stories of Church opposition, most of the repression is perpetrated by factions within the scientific community itself.
The Darwinists ridiculed Mendel's work in genetics because it contradicted their new "theory" - Mendel turned out to be right. Newton and many others were ignored and ridiculed by their own colleagues more than by the ecclesiastical authorities - yet they turned out to be right. It's almost a Law of Science that the viewpoint which is considered heresy by the "scientific community" is the one that turns out to be right in the end.
The ones who claim to be the guardians of science and knowledge are the very ones doing their utmost to silence opposing views, which is a direct violation of the scientific method. To me, this is proof that irrational Leftist politics is the motivating factor behind Global Warming.
mattm, I think your charact
January 18, 2007 - 18:27 ET by hydrodynDMmattm,
I think your characterization of science is incorrect - on a number of points.
First, there is no general view from scientists (at least not that I've worked with) that religion somehow impedes their work. This would be odd, if true, considering that most of the scientists I've met follow some religious faith.
Second, your use of the term "repression" to describe the way science evolves and incorportates new ideas or theories is bizarre. Radical or new ideas take time to check (and recheck and recheck). For example, Einstein didn't win his Nobel Price for Relativity. Instead, it was for his idea on the photoelectric effect (I think). The reason? Relativity was still relatively new and very radical and people still weren't convinced of its validity. But eventually they were, after enough independent experiments were done. Is this "repression"? No.
Your suggestion that the viewpoint that is seen as "heresy" is the one that inevitably turns out right is just plain wrong. For every theory that is ignored or dismissed that later turns out to have something to it, there are thousands that were rightfully ignored. It would take you have a second to find tons of websites dedicated to showing why Special Relativity and Quantum Mechanics are wrong and that offer different "theories". Their all a crock, of course and I doubt we will soon be rewriting our physics texts because of them.
Lastly, there are no "guardians of science". There are thousands of individuals working alone or in groups in research institutions or universities all over the world who work to contribute to their fields (and to make a living). Your suggestion that there is some effort to silence opposing views (whatever those are) suggests a kind of conspiracy and organization that doesn't exit.
By the way, the so called "Scientific Method" has nothing to do with what you are talking about. It also doesn't really have much to do with how science in the real world works either, but that's a separate topic.
Oh, and as far as I know, none of Newton's ideas or theories were ever ridiculed by this own colleagues. I could be wrong on this, so maybe you can tell me which ones you are referring to.
HydrodynDM,I'm with mattm on
January 18, 2007 - 19:03 ET by BuffNBoneHydrodynDM,
I'm with mattm on this one though it could be the academic community that is doing the mischaracterization. The way the historical "conflicts" between the church and science are presented may be the culprit. Take how Copericus' heliocentric helostatic debate is shown in textbooks. The data didn't lie, but explaining what it meant gets lost because the evil church was supressing knowledge and debate.
The biggest concern is how any questioning (debate) about Global Warming or Intelligent Design now gets stiffled. It seems like many of the points about the media raised by Bernie Goldberg in Bias and Arrogance ring true for portions of the scientific community as well.
"Fighters are fun but bombers make policy"
BuffNBone, My issue isn't w
January 18, 2007 - 19:27 ET by hydrodynDMBuffNBone,
My issue isn't with how certain scientific ideas (Global Warming and Evolution, as you mention) are debated - or not debated - in the public forum. I had issue with the way mattm described science.
I'm looking at it from the standpoint of a researcher (since that's the only viewpoint I know) and from my end, I see no grand political conspiracies trying to suppress unacceptable ideas or theories. And I have never seen the slightest hint of a conflict between science and religion. Also, you seem to differentiate between science proper (I guess) and the "academic community". The two are pretty much the same thing when it comes to fields like physics and math.
Historically, where there? I don't know. You mention Copernicus. Well, yes, he came up with a heliocentric model to help explain the data (which had improved over the years and made the deferent/epicycle models more and more complicated). When he presented the model, you suggested that is was just a useful tool to help in calculations - not that it actually represented the way things were. Why did he do this? Because he was affraid of the "evil church". I don't know. It's possible that he was a man of faith and honestly accepted the geocentric view.
And the whole Galileo thing wasn't as black and white as some like to describe it.
You seem to suggest that there are some in the scientific community who are actively suppresing other's views or ideas. I don't see how this is possible. What is to prevent me from doing research and writing and submitting a paper that opposes the views of someone else (assuming the research is valid)? Unless you are suggesting the review boards of all the major research periodicals are infiltrated with people who have an agenda. Which would be next to impossible considering the number of periodical, the number of people who act on these boards and the fact that they change over time.
So no. I don't see a parallel with what Goldberg (who's books I've read and liked) writes about.
Well, let me weigh in on your concept of 'science'.
January 18, 2007 - 19:48 ET by acaiguanaWell, let me weigh in on your concept of 'science'.
ACA here.
First, there is a great and heavy weight of Federal Dollars (that would be money) associated with scientific research. Your esoteric diatribe on what being a researcher is all about sorta omits this.
Second, science is not a 'free market' of ideas as you would propose with the 'publications' you cite (by the way, I missed the cite there big guy).
Third, when you talk about people sitting around a table with no 'agenda' are you talking about the UN committees or the groups who are somewhat 'biased' politically? Or are you talking about a buncha High School teachers who don't know any better?
I'd like to know as I am being bombarded 'politically' daily by idiots who want me to believe that if I pass gas, I'm contributing to global warming.
By the way, I build mathematical models of 'stuff'. And if you think I believe for one minute in the models of 'Global Warming' (anthropologically speaking) - well, get a life.
ACA
...
Acaiguana says: "I love blind Monkeys and any inference that I am making fun of blind Monkeys would be wrong.
ACA...To placate our liberal
January 18, 2007 - 19:59 ET by Clear thinkerACA...
To placate our liberal friends, I suggest we all agree to never pass gas again.
Does anyone here know what happens if you repeatedly keep yourself from passing wind?
You know I truly haven't laughed out loud for a very long time.
January 18, 2007 - 20:01 ET by acaiguanaYou know I truly haven't laughed out loud for a very long time.
And you did that.
Thanks. <edit - of course now people on the 'ward' are looking at me 'strangely'>
ACA
...
Acaiguana says: "I love blind Monkeys and any inference that I am making fun of blind Monkeys would be wrong.
My pleasure.
January 18, 2007 - 20:04 ET by Clear thinkerMy pleasure.
acaiguana, I appreciate you
January 18, 2007 - 20:19 ET by hydrodynDMacaiguana,
I appreciate your input. I will say that, like you, I build mathematical models of "stuff" - which is why I also don't put much weight in the predictions made global weather models. Escpecially when you consider how complicated the system they are trying to model is and the bazillions of assumptions and simplifications that are probably making to make sure their runs don't last 10 years.
I keep seeing people mention how funding has some big part in dictating what kind of research is done. In my area of work, politics isn't an issue, so admittedly, I speak from ignorance. If however, you, with your direct experience of such things, can tell me that some research proposals are denied because they aren't of the right kind - I'd like to hear about it. I personally have never heard of a DOE grant being denied because the research didn't toe the line. But I can be wrong on this.
I'd also like to know what you mean by science not being a free market of ideas. Science certainly isn't the idealistic march toward the truth that it's often portrayed to be, but if you could maybe explain what you meant, I could comment. And I'm not sure what "cite" you want. I had in mind periodicals like Phys Rev but ... again, if you could clarify.
And the people I was referring to were people who act on the review committiees of scientific periodical like Phys Rev - the folks who ultimately decide what papers to accept for they periodicals.
And unless you get your scientific info on global weather systems from peer reviewed papers - I know I don't - then your getting it from TV, newspapers or the radio and that, in my opinion, has very little to do with how science works. It seems to me, that those with political agendas and access to a camera are using science - and may even get a few opportunistic jerks from the science community to go along with them.
By the way, the derisive comments don't help your argument. If you wrote your post to me thinking I'm some apologist for Global Warmers, your wrong.
Excuse my 'derisive' comments. Chalk it up to cynicsm.
January 18, 2007 - 20:31 ET by acaiguanaExcuse my 'derisive' comments. Chalk it up to cynicsm.
I'm a little bored with the argument over scientific reserch, method, and other insanity of ignoring the money behind same.
Further, although your response seems resonable at first glance, I'm a bit 'cynical. at your ignoring the reality of political influences on the money.
Now, I have a couple of companies that do nothing but research. They don't always make a lot of money, but of course when they do, it's another thing altogether. I'd like to believe you live in a 'bubble' of free maket ideas, but I don't.
Sorry.
ACA
...
Acaiguana says: "I love blind Monkeys and any inference that I am making fun of blind Monkeys would be wrong.
acaiguana, I appreciate you
January 18, 2007 - 20:50 ET by hydrodynDMacaiguana,
I appreciate your honestly about how naive my comments seem. And that's fair. I don't work in the private sector so the link between economics and politics isn't anything I ever deal with. And my area of work - condensed matter physics - isn't exactly a hot bed of political debate.
I'll admit to working in an academic bubble. So I'll be clear here - I personally have never heard of academic research in physics being influence by politics. Egos and inter group rivalries, yes. Is it possible that it happens all the time in other areas of research (or even my own)? Sure. I'm not privy to every grant that's submitted.
That said, maybe I'm just being stupid. I still don't see how some researcher in some part of the world who submits a paper on global warming to some random periodical is going to be railroaded if his results don't match up with the political views of the left here in the US.
Maybe I'm just not getting what you mean by a "'bubble' of free market ideas".
ACA & hydro - See Jane run. Run Jane run
January 18, 2007 - 20:57 ET by Eric TurnerYou guys must be really smart. I feel real dumb. I can't talk about mathmatical models. :((
I'm gonna go read my Dick and Jane books now.
Hey, can you do me a favor and just type out a real smart sounding paragraph that I can save and then copy and paste whenever I want to sound smart?
Please? ;)
AKA: armyvet
OK, Eric, you asked for it. Here it is. ACA
January 18, 2007 - 21:02 ET by acaiguanaOK, Eric, you asked for it. Here it is. ACA
and it comes with a picture.
ACA
...
Acaiguana says: "I love blind Monkeys and any inference that I am making fun of blind Monkeys would be wrong.
WOW! Now that's what I'm ta
January 18, 2007 - 21:14 ET by Eric TurnerWOW! Now that's what I'm talking about.
I really wish I had had good math and algebra instructors in school. I think I would have enjoyed it more. Math is pure you know? I mean there are absolutes in math unlike many other disciplines.
Thanks ACA. Appreciate your sense of humor! ;)
AKA: armyvet
Hey, Army, check your PM.
January 18, 2007 - 21:22 ET by acaiguanaHey, Army, check your PM.
ACA
...
Acaiguana says: "I love blind Monkeys and any inference that I am making fun of blind Monkeys would be wrong.
Eric Turner, "Math is
January 18, 2007 - 21:30 ET by hydrodynDMEric Turner,
"Math is pure you know? I mean there are absolutes in math unlike many other disciplines."
Well, sorta. If your interested, look up Godel's Incompleteness Theorems.
Eric Turner, Soooo, you hav
January 18, 2007 - 21:02 ET by hydrodynDMEric Turner,
Soooo, you have a problem with two people talking about topics that aren't on the level of who sucked on American Idol?
Or do you just not like hearing that there are people out there who actually have specialized skills that they use at work.
Or maybe your just 15 years old and have nothing better to complain about at the moment and think that a sarcastic post will make you come across as clever?
Let me know.
Now see Hydro, that was just
January 18, 2007 - 21:13 ET by Eric TurnerNow see Hydro, that was just rude. I was actually quite intrigued by your conversation with ACA. But let me address your points in order:
1) I don't watch American Idol. For that matter I watch very little TV unless it has to do with the American Revolution or the Middle Ages (Early and High periods). Other than that, I find most of it boring.
2) Actually, I really enjoy reading or listening to people who have "specialized skills that they use at work." Listening (reading) someone else's enthuasiasm for what they do instills within me the same enthusiasm.
3) I am glad I'm not 15 anymore. That was a tough time (not to bore you with any baggage). But I am already semi-retired.
4) Although technically still part of #3, I'll use it as a separate point - I was not trying to be "clever" with a "sarcastic post."
Accept my apologies for what you consider sarcasm or immaturity. I saw it as jocularity and I was truly impressed. Obviously, you saw it differently.
AKA: armyvet
ET, keep in mind that sarcasm
January 18, 2007 - 21:24 ET by JABET, keep in mind that sarcasm is hard to detect on others posts unless you know them. Hydro was justified in his response not knowing your persona, IMHO.
I commend you on keeping your cool and the acknowledgement of your short comings in this conversation; I look forward to your future postings.
"Too bad Ignorance isn't painful to the Ignorant"
JAB, you know it's funny. But
January 18, 2007 - 21:29 ET by Eric TurnerJAB, you know it's funny. But as soon as I hit send I thought of that. I figured ACA would catch it but I thought Hydro might catch it differently. I even thought of doing a follow-up immediately to clarify.
All's well that ends well.
AKA: armyvet
ET, it's all good my friend,
January 18, 2007 - 21:37 ET by JABET, it's all good my friend, we may disagree on some issues but civility rules on this site (when the Trolls are not present). I see you have already received an apology, almost as fast as I could post a response to you.
"Too bad Ignorance isn't painful to the Ignorant"
"civility rules on this
January 18, 2007 - 21:49 ET by Eric Turner"civility rules on this site "
And that's what I enjoy so much about this site. I've visited other sites and there is not a lot of civility. Thanks for the encouragement.
AKA: armyvet
Eric Turner, Oops. My bad.
January 18, 2007 - 21:24 ET by hydrodynDMEric Turner,
Oops. My bad. I totally misread the tone of your post.
Sorry about that.
Maybe I should check my driver's licence for may age.
Yeah. That was pretty fucking
January 19, 2007 - 11:09 ET by Mr. KafirWell, you don't have to be 'privy to every grant...'
January 18, 2007 - 20:59 ET by acaiguanaWell, you don't have to be 'privy to every grant...'
What you need to do is wake up a bit. There is a great amount of $$ being spent on Global Warming. You may not like it or you may, but to either ignore it or to pretend it isn't important ignores the purpose of this very thread itself.
Now, for example, me, I actually build models of real life systems. I'm talking about transaction systems in financial markets as well as appying 'game theory' to human behavior with respect to how people react to issues of money in their pockets.
OK, so what?
Well, to start with, the arena of ideas is determined by results. Not some ideologic concept of what a result might someday be? Are you with me yet?
I'm not being crude here to you, I'm trying to explain that when someone comes to me with an idea regarding the environment, for example, I would like to see a 'cite' of some scientific evicedence they are right.
You asked me what 'cites' I was asking for. You mentioned 'journals' and I'm saying that would be more than one and maybe more than two?
ACA
...
Acaiguana says: "I love blind Monkeys and any inference that I am making fun of blind Monkeys would be wrong.
acaiguana, As I said, I don
January 18, 2007 - 21:19 ET by hydrodynDMacaiguana,
As I said, I don't work in the private sector and so the accuracy of my research doesn't dictate how much money I make (at least in the short term). To paraphrase Ghostbusters - I've never worked in the private sector. They expect results.
If your telling me that money and politics has a huge influence in the areas of science that deal with modeling global weather systems - ok. I'm in no position to argue. I still don't see what prevents me, right now, from getting access to one of my university computers and building such a model and, assuming it shows that man made whatevers don't affect the planet's weather systems, getting it published. You seem to suggest that if I try that (granted, it aint gonna happen), I will get my paper rejected by every scientific periodical for political reasons.
Maybe we are talking two different things - scientific work in academia vs scientific work in the private sector. You mentioned citing papers if your gonna pitch some idea about global warming. Well, that's a no brainer to me. It's why I don't take anything a guy like Al Gore says seriously. But even then, if you have a fist full of published paper, so what? So ten groups using basically the same model come up with basically the same result. Woopdy, do. They are still models and models of a horribly complicated system.
I'm not sure what your last sentence means - maybe I already addressed it above. If not, let me know.
Actually, hydrodynDM, you make sense.
January 18, 2007 - 21:29 ET by acaiguanaActually, hydrodynDM, you make sense.
But, if I hadn't taken you to task would you still be blathering on about how you 'didn't know?'
I'm not sure.
Again, I have no panacea to this 'science' of Global Warming. I don't like the idea of science being politicized.
Pretty much puts me in the Private Sector.
I'd like to believe being with a 'University' takes you out of that Sector, but,
I don't.
ACA
...
Acaiguana says: "I love blind Monkeys and any inference that I am making fun of blind Monkeys would be wrong.
acaiguana, You and I can di
January 18, 2007 - 21:46 ET by hydrodynDMacaiguana,
You and I can disagree about how much influence politics has in academic research - it's no big deal.
I never hesitate to acknowledge when I'm commenting on something that I have limited knowledge about. I work at one school in a very small area of science and I know a handful of scientists. Like I said, I've never heard of research being influenced by politics - but I don't work on models of weather systems, which is really the type of research we are talking about.
It's just that, given how research results are distributed (and I didn't even mention that fact that most people publish their result online at "pre-pub" sites), I can't see how anyone's work (assuming it is solid research) could be censored for political reasons.
But you can take that for what it's worth. Maybe I'm idealistic and someday I'll know better. In which case, I'll owe you a beer.
hydrodynDM, I'm trying to tell you that somewhere, money is...
January 18, 2007 - 21:52 ET by acaiguanahydrodynDM, I'm trying to tell you that somewhere, money is involved.
Now, that might be transparent to you. Take an economics course at your school. I'm sure they must have one. I confess, I studied Economics under Jerry Jordan. You probably don't have that option.
But try.
ACA
...
Acaiguana says: "I love blind Monkeys and any inference that I am making fun of blind Monkeys would be wrong.
acaiguana, I know there is
January 18, 2007 - 22:05 ET by hydrodynDMacaiguana,
I know there is money involved - I do get a paycheck for my work and grant proposals have to be written. And aside from the fact that it would be odd for my students to have me sitting next to them in an Econ class, I doubt it would convince me that politics and the money that drives it has much to do with my research.
But as I just acknowledged to danbo just now (see below), I'm will to accept that it influences some areas of science.
Quit being concerned about who sits next to you.
January 18, 2007 - 22:10 ET by acaiguanaQuit being concerned about who sits next to you.
Gosh, you have such opportunity with your mind. Let me ask you this...
If Einstein were sitting across from you at the table and his IQ doubled ... Would you notice?
um...."
ACA
...
Acaiguana says: "I love blind Monkeys and any inference that I am making fun of blind Monkeys would be wrong.
acaiguana, The class commen
January 18, 2007 - 22:26 ET by hydrodynDMacaiguana,
The class comment was meant to be flippant.
For a more serious reply, your either suggesting that I need to take econ classes to become familiar with a complicated topic that I obviously know nothing about - in which case a single econ class (or even a handful) isn't gonna make anyone an expert in anything.
Or your class comment was a off hand way of telling me that I should take the time out to familiarize myself with economic principles which aren't really all that hard to understand but would help me see your point - in which case I don't really need to take an econ class.
Either way, talking down to me as if I were a child in need of your personal advice doesn't really add any substance to your argument. I've been nothing but cordial. You, however, have basically accused me of either lying or being so ignorant about the goings on of my own area of work that even you can tell I'm totally wrong.
Just as a side note - danbo managed to get me to rethink my position with one well worded and thought out post - something you seemed to have trouble doing after what - five or six?
Hydro, ACA, ET, et al
January 18, 2007 - 22:32 ET by Noel SheppardHydro, ACA, ET, et al:
I just wanted to take a moment to thank
you folks for a great discussion. I really enjoyed reading this, and
wish that such civil and enlightening conversations occurred here more
often.
Warmest regards, and please keep up the good work!!!
Of course, if you do this too frequently, they won't need me, will they?!? :-) ns
Well, Noel, you mighta jumped a gun here.
January 18, 2007 - 22:36 ET by acaiguanaWell, Noel, you mighta jumped a gun here.
ACA
...
Acaiguana says: "I love blind Monkeys and any inference that I am making fun of blind Monkeys would be wrong.
ACA
January 18, 2007 - 22:38 ET by Noel SheppardACA,
Are you suggesting that I might be guilty of premature commentatus? I hate it when THAT happens! ns
Noel, No no. We would never
January 18, 2007 - 22:41 ET by hydrodynDMNoel,
No no. We would never besmirch the quality of the threads here.
Civility all the way.
God forbid, Noel.
January 18, 2007 - 22:42 ET by acaiguanaGod forbid, Noel.
ACA
...
Acaiguana says: "I love blind Monkeys and any inference that I am making fun of blind Monkeys would be wrong.
Hydro, ACA, JAB et al
January 18, 2007 - 22:54 ET by Noel SheppardHydro, ACA, Jab et al:
Good. Then my work is done here. Now play nice you crazy kids! :-) ns
We'll do Noel, although being
January 18, 2007 - 23:04 ET by JABWe'll do Noel, although being good is tough at times. Thanks for everything, I shall place you in my prayers tonight -- again. Take care and God Bless to you and yours, as well as the NB's family; good night all, must sign off for now.
"Too bad Ignorance isn't painful to the Ignorant"
JAB
January 18, 2007 - 23:14 ET by Noel SheppardJAB,
Thanks for your kind thoughts. Good night to you and yours as well. ns
I gotta get off this thread, hydrodynDM 'cause it's going South.
January 18, 2007 - 22:32 ET by acaiguanaGee I missed where I said 'lying'.
either lying or being so ignorant about the goings on of my own area of work that even you can tell I'm totally wrong.
I really sorta resent your implicatons here. I'm trying to be a nice guy (not the French sorta nice) and you are suddenly turning angry.
I meant what I said.
I'm gonna start a new thread with you because this one is down to one word, and if you search on me, you will see, I don't do one word threads.
ACA
...
Acaiguana says: "I love blind Monkeys and any inference that I am making fun of blind Monkeys would be wrong.
If you wrote grants. Were the
January 18, 2007 - 23:22 ET by danboIf you wrote grants. Were there certain thinks you know you had to say to improve the chances of your grant getting approved? No mater how worth while the subject. Any subject you know will never be approved?
Fortunately, I didn't have to get too involved in the grant writing process. But knew there were things to say and not say.
I did have a few experiences with grant auditors. It was kind of like being on the old "You Bet Your Life." (Showing my age.) There was a magic word you had to say. And if you said it. A duck would come down with a message. You keep your grant.
"The urge to save humanity is almost always a false front for the urge to rule.” H.L. Mencken
danbo, Like you, I never re
January 18, 2007 - 23:38 ET by hydrodynDMdanbo,
Like you, I never really got into the grant writing process - basically looking over the shoulder of my advisor in grad school (not that long ago) and it isn't something I've had to do yet in my current position.
But like you suggest, there seemed to me a kind of "form letter" approach to it. You emphasis how important the work is and how it will make important contributions and how it might have real world applications in such and such a field and blah blah blah.
I always had the impression that it was kind of a formality in the sense that if you worked with an established group or in an established field on topics that made sense, you got a grant of some kind - it was just a matter of how much.
But like I said, my understanding of this is basically second hand, so I might be wrong about how easy it is or isn't.
danbo, hydro
January 18, 2007 - 23:50 ET by BlondeI have zero experience writing scientific type funding grants....
But a wealth of experience writing not-for-profit type grants of all types (foundations, local, state, and federal requests).
I'd imagine both types of grant requests are rather similar.
One must cross certain t's, dot certain i's.....utilize the current vogue lingo.
For instance, about ten years ago (which is when I did my last serious grant writing), the hot button phrase was "performance based outcome objectives". I even went to a class on how to write these properly.
But I got most of the grants I wrote funded.
I'm not so sure I'd call it a "form letter" approach....but it takes a certain talent to do properly. Interestingly enough, I've been able to translate this skill quite successfully into the private sector. Weird, huh?
Hey Blondie. Yep I took grant
January 19, 2007 - 08:49 ET by danboHey Blondie. Yep I took grant writing in grad school also. Did write the outline to a couple of demonstration grants. (Approved) But never had to do the tough part of the gathering all the data and writing the final draft.Or bringing it before committee. (Thank goodness.)
"Performance based outcomes". Want me to pull my hair out. A buzz phrase, that people in Washington use. A place where you twist the stuff around to get it through. The You Bet Your Life, game.
A number of years ago. I was in a group where it was suggested we apply for positions as grant reviewers, to recommend approval or not. (We knew how agencies function and the field.) Even took a couple of classes on it. (A couple of weekends a year in DC. A couple of more bucks.) Considered it but didn't apply.
Lots of double speak here. Example. We were told not to look at the money, just the structure, the project, how important it was etc.
Example grant. All of that looked good. Outcome. Rejected. Reason. The amout listed for the computers was too high.
As I knew what agencies deal with. I questioned it. The government told us what vendors could be used for what equipment. And you have to buy that specific piece of equipment from that specific vendor at a specific price. Even if you can go down to the nearest office depot and buy it for half price. (The normal situation, unfortunately.)Computers were on that list for us. It's called the competitive bid law.
Closest I ever came to getting fired was for side stepping the competitive bid law. I saved the state a whole lot of money. (I could go on for hours about the competitive bid law.)
A friend who did take a job as a grant reviewer related to me. (State level.) His group of reviewers was given about an hour to review 5 grants. (You can measure grants by the pounds or inches rather than the pages.) There was no way to review those grants. But he did look at all the pages that showed who was on the board. Who was getting paid. How much etc. The same persons name was on all the grants. And to provide the time he's supposed to. He was working something like 36 hour days. (Not counting the other grants he has.) (I know who the man is. Guess he needed a nice third home, a vacation home in the Caribbean and a new Mercedes.)
Not all grants are shady. But it's there. This is political power. Where money is funneled to certain people. .
"The urge to save humanity is almost always a false front for the urge to rule.” H.L. Mencken
Welcome, Hydro.I just retired
January 19, 2007 - 09:07 ET by danboWelcome, Hydro.I just retired. So you know I've been out of grad school a while.
Hopefully your field is freer from agendas and the power plays than mine. (There's a good bit of money in mine, Also a lot of egos. (I'm an expert. I'm god. Kind of thing.))
The further you go, the closer you will get to the agendas and power plays.
There's lots of good stuff going on. Unfortunately too often the agendas and power plays get in the way of doing what needs to be done.
"The urge to save humanity is almost always a false front for the urge to rule.” H.L. Mencken
Let me weigh in on there bein
January 18, 2007 - 21:31 ET by danboLet me weigh in on there being no grand political attempts at suppressing science or unacceptable science. As William Happer said (Who was fired at DOE for daring to disagree with then vice president over the ozone hole.) There can be no suppression of science without the participation of scientist.
There are numerous examples. Perhaps one of the most extreme examples would be Lysenko's control of biology in the Soviet Union, where Lysenko declared that the genetics of Mendel’s peas and Morgan’s fruit flies was incorrect and simply a capitalist plot to exploit the peasants and working class. N. I. Vavilov, a plant breeder of international renown, died in prison. Others were simply shot.
In our own country. After "The Silent Spring". Research considered friendly to DDT was, 1 ignored then became almost impossible. Then millions died due to a resurgence of Malaria in third world.
Happer as I mentioned was fired for disagreeing with Gore on the environment. Fred Singer was intimidated and there was an attempt to slur him for work he did with Gores Mentor (Roger Revelle) not friendly to the AGW stand of the Senator Gore. And it wasn't that many months ago thet The Royal Society stated the the oil companies should not be allowed to fund research that did not support the AGW hypothesis.
This thread is about a person who calls herself a climatologist telling the society to silence those who disagree.
Sorry I have to disagree with you on the no attempts to suppress.
Good reading: http://www.hoover.org/publications/books/3003781.html
"The urge to save humanity is almost always a false front for the urge to rule.” H.L. Mencken
danbo, This is what I like.
January 18, 2007 - 22:00 ET by hydrodynDMdanbo,
This is what I like. Having your own ideas smacked around a bit.
Admittedly, my experience is limited to a theoretical area of work that no one really cares about - no politics and no big money. I'll look through the book you linked to when I have time, but for now, I'll accept your examples.
Of course, I'm sure I'm still right (said in a self deprecating tone), I just have to figure out a way to argue it.
BTW This will be a big money
January 18, 2007 - 23:30 ET by danboBTW This will be a big money area. Carbon trading. (Enron was for carbon trading. They were going to make money.) They want carbon taxes to pay lots of people to do research,
"The urge to save humanity is almost always a false front for the urge to rule.” H.L. Mencken
danbo, Thanks for the advic
January 18, 2007 - 23:41 ET by hydrodynDMdanbo,
Thanks for the advice. But I think you know that it's hard to shift your area of work - plus, I'm just really lazy.
Anyways, my current position emphasizes teaching over research (thank god).
Come now, HDM. The contyrol
January 19, 2007 - 12:22 ET by NL207Come now, HDM. The control of grant money and publication is the same thing as the control of scientific debate.
Consider what's happening right now in the two top scientific journals. Science has been scandalized by its blatant biases in favor of certain types of articles. They have been forced to retract all the Hu Suk Hwang work they published [stem cell] and some of their pro-Global Warming publications have come under fire as well. The only reason they won't have to retract the Oreskes paper is its status as an essay and not a scientific paper.
Nature isn't doing much better. They got behind Michael Mann, publishing both MBH98 and MBH99. Mann hasn't been willing to publish the software he used to process his tree ring data. He has supplied information only to a few colleagues he deems to be intellectually friendly, meaning that it really hasn't received a full peer review nor have his results been independently verified by neutral or critical researchers. I suspect he has failed to adequately account for the fertilizing effect of increased CO2 and has overestimated the contribution temperature has made vs rainfall, cloud cover, and solar output. This wouild explain why his results are so at variance with other methods over intervals including the mini ice age and the tail of the medieval warm period around 1100AD. I also understand he has a set of results going back 2000 years now to go with his 400 and 1000 year reconstructions.
Hydro,I didn't have time to b
January 19, 2007 - 12:48 ET by mattmHydro,
I didn't have time to be long-winded, so I didn't develop the context properly. First of all, I was making a point on the political aspects of this issue, because Global Warming, Environmentalism, Science Education in schools, Oil, etc. are all political issues.
But that doesn't mean the scientific side of my point is invalid. My point is that the concept of something akin to an "accepted view" shouldn't exist in science, which should be the pursuit of knowledge...which is what the word "science" means.
The history of science is rife with examples where people advancing ideas that contradict the "accepted view" were initially ridiculed, but were later found to have been correct. Mendel is the classic example of this.
The arrogance and intellectual snobbery of the self-appointed "scientific community", which seems to permeate your response, is a classic example of what's been wrong with "science" since the dawn of time, mainly because it leads to wrong conclusions (i.e. global warming is caused by capitalism) and wrong "solutions" -i.e Kyoto.
Global warming goons
January 18, 2007 - 16:05 ET by rbosqueThe left sure likes to cry "McCarthyism" alot but they certainly don't mind practicing it. Of course the MSM will cover for them as always.
I'm scanning the msm for cov
January 18, 2007 - 16:37 ET by RunningBeerI'm scanning the msm for coverage but not finding anything from them. Hope it comes out soon, I have to leave shortly. Heading over to Malibu for great ski weekend!
Yeah RB...I had a long diatri
January 18, 2007 - 16:58 ET by bigtimerYeah RB...I had a long diatribe this morning about this phony weather alarmist know it all, I added in tell that to the leftist in Malibu and the Hollywood crowd that believe in Global Warming...
I'm still gonna sue Algore and his phony crew of junk scientists, there are some families in the SW states that died not expecting or being able to handle this cold weather, wonder if they should bring a class action lawsuit...after-all we have been fed this GWing stuff forever now!
Heidi has a lot of nerve....what a wicked weather-woman.
..."If we ever forget that we are a Nation Under God....then we will be a Nation Gone Under." Ronald Reagan
Here is part of what a good r
January 18, 2007 - 17:35 ET by bigtimerHere is part of what a good reason to sue Algore and all the junk-scientists that I was referring to in above post about the outright lies about Global Warming and the deaths it has caused....
....."If we ever forget that we are a Nation Under God....then we will be a Nation Gone Under." Ronald Reagan
I'm scanning the msm for cov
January 18, 2007 - 16:39 ET by RunningBeerI'm scanning the msm for coverage but not finding anything from them. Hope it comes out soon, I have to leave shortly. Heading over to Malibu for some great powder action!
Crap! My 1st double post.
January 18, 2007 - 16:40 ET by RunningBeerCrap! My 1st double post. Will that bring the site down again???
I don't think so!
January 18, 2007 - 16:42 ET by misterbillI don't think so!
I don't think so!
January 18, 2007 - 16:44 ET by misterbillI don't think so!
I think knot. Sad the frayed string.
January 18, 2007 - 16:49 ET by acaiguanaI think knot. Sad the frayed string.
ACA
...
Acaiguana says: "I love blind Monkeys and any inference that I am making fun of blind Monkeys would be wrong.
methinks......
January 18, 2007 - 17:27 ET by misterbillmethinks------ you think naught!! LOL and don't be afrayed!
As long as we're posting stupid stuff
January 18, 2007 - 17:44 ET by Eric TurnerAKA: armyvet
I can't stop laughing av, ET!
January 18, 2007 - 17:54 ET by bigtimerI can't stop laughing av, ET!!
Needed that today!
That is excellent...I am saving it!
"If we ever forget that we are a Nation Under God....then we will be a Nation Gone Under." Ronald Reagan
Bigtimer, here's the site I pulled it from.
January 18, 2007 - 17:58 ET by Eric TurnerGlad to be of help. I wish I could claim it (naturally). I heard it a long time ago when I was a kid, and here is the site that I got this version from.
AKA: armyvet
ET,...hey thanks got it saved
January 18, 2007 - 18:03 ET by bigtimerET,
...hey thanks got it saved too...very interesting.
"If we ever forget that we are a Nation Under God....then we will be a Nation Gone Under." Ronald Reagan
So, bt, poetry is the way to
January 18, 2007 - 18:28 ET by MikeBSo, bt, poetry is the way to your heart?
It was midnight on the ocean,
Not a streetcar was in sight,
The sun was shining brightly,
In the middle of the night.
A barefoot boy with shoes on,
Stood there sitting in a tree,
And when I put my glasses on,
I heard a melody.
You might like this site, too.
"A communist is someone who reads Marx. An anti-communist is someone who understands Marx." Ronald Reagan
What are we fighting for atte
January 18, 2007 - 18:32 ET by Eric TurnerWhat are we fighting for attention now??? Arghh.... >:|
AKA: armyvet
I love poetry, I love the sit
January 18, 2007 - 18:39 ET by bigtimerI love poetry, I love the site too Mike, it is saved!
You fella's gave this gal a big ol' smile and lot's of much needed laughs today!
Thanks!
Oxymoron's are great!
"If we ever forget that we are a Nation Under God....then we will be a Nation Gone Under." Ronald Reagan
I've always prefaced this sto
January 18, 2007 - 20:29 ET by crsheddI've always prefaced this story with:
I come before you to stand behind you
to tell you a story I have never heard before.
I heard it said as "I co
January 18, 2007 - 21:45 ET by UnsaneI heard it said as "I come before you to stand behind you to talk to you about something about which I know nothing."
"HAV3 TH3 BRIDG3S OF INSANITY B33N CROSS3D AND FOR3V3R R3TRACT3D???." - Meshuggah, "3ntrapm3nt", from Catch Thirty Thr33 (2005)
Eric, AKA Armyvet, having rea
January 18, 2007 - 20:43 ET by JABEric, AKA Armyvet, having read and remembered this "poem" and knowing what "Maggies Drawers" (in a pervious post of yours) are concerns me in regard to my age or the amount of time I spent as a youngster listening to my elders. Thanks a million for the memories :-)
This site, in my opinion, congoles conscience on many levels on a regular basis.
"Too bad Ignorance isn't painful to the Ignorant"
JAB, glad I could be of service
January 18, 2007 - 21:56 ET by Eric Turner"regard to my age"
I trust your age isn't so old you are forgetting those memories. But I am glad I could be of service with regards to your memories.
But alas, I believe my memory is starting to fade as I can't recall mentioning "Maggies Drawers". But they say that memory is the second thing to go.
AKA: armyvet
ET, if you could not remember
January 18, 2007 - 22:22 ET by JABET, if you could not remember the "Maggies Drawers" statement and I could not pull it up under our search on this site, it may be myself that needs to punt on the memory/Age situation.
However, with that said, you having been in the Military, surely you know what "Maggies Drawers" are, right?
"Too bad Ignorance isn't painful to the Ignorant"
Maggies drawers
January 18, 2007 - 22:28 ET by Eric TurnerYes, it's been a long time since I heard it but yes. They undeniable red flag telling you that you suck and can't hit a target. As most ranges are now computerized and such they don't use them really anymore - that I know of.
AKA: armyvet
Smart assSmart ass
January 18, 2007 - 17:20 ET by RunningBeerSmart ass
Smart ass
RB
January 18, 2007 - 17:23 ET by Noel SheppardStop it!
RB
January 18, 2007 - 17:23 ET by Noel SheppardStop it!
Meterologists who do not allo
January 18, 2007 - 16:16 ET by Andrew H.Meterologists who do not allow for disagreement on the cause of global warming--or whether there is in fact global warming should have their credentials pulled, Hiedi.
How very wonderfully, dreamily, cutie pie Stalanist of you, dear.
Liberalism is a convenient lie.
She apparently doesn't know t
January 18, 2007 - 16:20 ET by danboShe apparently doesn't know that there are conditions where a hurricane like event can spin in the opposite direction.
Does this say something about her compentency?
"Those who cast the votes decide nothing. Those who count the votes decide everything."
-- Joseph Stalin
According to her Weather Chan
January 18, 2007 - 22:10 ET by Del DolemonteAccording to her Weather Channel bio, she got her degree at Columbia University, that far right-wing institution in NY City. And guess what? It wasn't in meteorology, but in engineering. To be fair, she also got a doctorate in "climatology" there. But the last time I checked, Columbia wasn't exactly the best or greatest school to study the weather at-many state universities have meteorology programs that are much better, even a small school in New Hampshire, Plymouth State.
What happened? There was some
January 18, 2007 - 16:16 ET by danboWhat happened? There was some nice stuff here before. Hope you're able to get it back.
I will take a moment to invite you all to another fight or slug fest.
NERC (National Environment Research Council) decided to issue a challenge.
Well a couple of sceptical scientist decided to show up, and take the challenge. Lots of jabs. Lots of dodging and weaving.
A fun show.
http://www.nerc.ac.uk/about/consult/debate/debate.aspx?did=1&pg=1
"Those who cast the votes decide nothing. Those who count the votes decide everything."
-- Joseph Stalin
NERC Update:Apparently NERC h
January 18, 2007 - 17:06 ET by danboNERC Update:
Apparently NERC has begun blocking the sceptic scientist. (Plural)
Let's see if this is temporary.
"Those who cast the votes decide nothing. Those who count the votes decide everything."
-- Joseph Stalin
NERC UPDATEFrom: http://nuc
January 19, 2007 - 12:01 ET by danboNERC UPDATE
From: http://nuclear.com/
"The urge to save humanity is almost always a false front for the urge to rule.” H.L. Mencken
At least those messages that
January 19, 2007 - 12:27 ET by danboAt least those messages that get through are still there. As:
"The urge to save humanity is almost always a false front for the urge to rule.” H.L. Mencken
Noel - I asked question earli
January 18, 2007 - 16:33 ET by RunningBeerNoel - I asked question earlier (sorry if that's what crashed the site), what are the chances of the AMS actually taking this ridiculous action against meteorologists?
RB
January 18, 2007 - 16:36 ET by Noel SheppardRB,
No idea. I think that would be a dangerous requirement. Could the American Bar Association for instance require that all of its attorneys think a certain way on any given issue? Could any licensing bureau in any industry have such a black and white requirement of its members other than on ethics and legal issues? I doubt it. ns
Hopefully it's just a bunch o
January 18, 2007 - 17:15 ET by RunningBeerHopefully it's just a bunch of grandstanding. As long as AMS doesn't go along with her. That could be a huge hurdle for us "GW deniers.". I figured it shouldn't take more than 3 - 5 yrs before these so called scientists do an about face on the issue but if the AMS agrees with this loon, it could be a long battle.
AMS is a scientific body as w
January 19, 2007 - 13:14 ET by NL207AMS is a scientific body as well as a professional organization. It is one of the last bastions where citics/opponents of AGW theory openly express themselves in numbers. Most meteorologists do not accept the notion that mankind is capable of creating catastrophic climate effects in the manner AGW describes, despite the fact their society has endorsed global warming. Silencing or converting these critics is a high priority item for the AGW crowd. Notice what the pro-AGW posters who visit here have to say about meteorologists. throatwobbler for one. He constantly dismisses them as unqualified. He is not himself a scientist. He reads this condescending crap over at realclimate, Michael Mann's apologist site. This is the attitude of the AGW scientific community. If you do not agree with them, then you are obviously incompetent. This is exactly what this weather channel toots is saying. And don't think it won't happen. Orthodoxy is not new to science and AMS is subservient to the government, whose bureaucracy has adopted AGW as part of its creed.
BTW: This last year, 2006, is a huge serving of humble pie for this lot. There is one damning piece of data they have been scurrying to sweep under the rug: There are various least squares poplynomial regression fits to the average global temperature per year chart. They differ only in the polynomial function or series being used to fit the data. ALL of these smooth curve best fits rolled over to an inflection point in 2005 after 38 years of continuous monotonic upward growth [1967 was the last inflection point]. Because 2006 was globally only the 6th warmest on record, despite being an El Nino year, the best fit curves will all have negative slopes in 2006 if they are recomputed as before with this new year of data added ... It is getting cooler, not warmer. I certainly cannot predict what the long term will turn out to be, but present measurements say global warming hasn't in the last ten years.
Please educate. I didn't take
January 19, 2007 - 14:17 ET by danboPlease educate. I didn't take calculus. Is least squares polynominal regression. Kind of like a moving averages, where the averages are used to differentiate the normal yearly variation from trend?
Unfortunately, it's not just people like throatpecker. If you went over to NERC you might have caught the exchange over glaciers and particularly Mt Killmanjaro. When asked the bases for the assertion that the glacer retreat was due to AGW. The response. That was what a specific scientist stated (I forget the name) and he's an expert in this.
When they pointed out Zbigniew Jaworowski's work. The response. His specialty wasn't in glaciers. When Jaworowski's background in glaciers over many decades was pointed out. The response. We're not here to discuss anyones credentials.
These are IPCC writers. And they practice the same kind of dismissive science as Throatpecker.
Of course. You have to do that if you don't have much.
"The urge to save humanity is almost always a false front for the urge to rule.” H.L. Mencken
There are two very widely use
January 19, 2007 - 16:14 ET by NL207There are two very widely used methods used to fit smooth curves to diiscrete data sets over some interval, [t1, t2]. In essential theory, they amount to the same thing. Least squares is one of thes fitting techniques. The other is matrix transformation. Fourier series is a form of matrix transformation. [ I haven't done THIS stuff in a few years!]. The object of both exercises is to produce a set of coefficients for the terms of some arbitrary function which, when the function is plotted over the interval of interest in the space in question, produce the smallest error.
In this case the space is two dimensional, Temperature in degrees vs. years. The interval in question is the period 1850, when reliable temperature records were first kept, to present. The degree units used don't matter. Its all the same Fahrenheit, Celsius or Kelvin since each can be converted to the other by a simple linear relationship.
The least error: The best fit is evaluated without regard to the sign of the error. Squaring the error at each point eliminates the sign since a negative time a negative is positive. The sum of the squared errors is a measure if overall accuracy of the fit. Minimize the sum and you achieved the best fit that particular function can ever get to the given set of data.
This link summarizes it nicely.
Hey Heidi, lets just burn the
January 18, 2007 - 16:42 ET by CaringwhiteguyHey Heidi, let's just burn these "non-believers" at the stake. Maybe the Weather Channel can set up a satellite studio for you in Salem. Speaking of reality and staging for effect . . . . I'm continually amused when the WC goes to remote sites and its reporters attempt to portray the weather conditions as bad as possible. They've always got the hoods to their parkas up as they're being blown down the street by torrential storms, braving frostbite or dodging tsunamis. I'm surprised any of them survive their assignments. They're almost as good at it as that guy in the orange vest in Lebanon.
Purification by fire!!! Bri
January 18, 2007 - 17:18 ET by RunningBeerPurification by fire!!! Bring it on!!!
If she can accurately tell me
January 18, 2007 - 16:54 ET by Clear thinkerIf she can accurately tell me what the weather will be for the next 6 Fridays in a row, I will consider her plea.
I'll be waiting for her to email me with the forecast.
Yawol, Mein Freulein!
January 18, 2007 - 17:10 ET by Howard NemerovDu vill hab nein comments on der veather. Ve are die schmart vuns, und du must listen to uns! Und du vill like it! Und vile ve are here, ve vill abshutten News Busters, vecause du do not agree vit uns. Ve believe in tolerance and fair use, und if du disagree, du vill be shot! (Or at least fined $200,000) Sieg Hill!
Nein
January 18, 2007 - 17:16 ET by misterbillNein . Sie sind der diktator!
Ya.. Ya..America is best desc
January 18, 2007 - 17:20 ET by USA4freedomYa.. Ya..
America is best described by one word, freedom... Dwight D. Eisenhower
Humm, think our way- or be se
January 18, 2007 - 17:19 ET by USA4freedomHumm, think our way- or be sent to the re-education camps. Where have I heard that before??
If humans are sooooo powerful with the weather systems in the world. Make it rain in the middle of a drought. Make all that snow go away from the Midwest. Global warming caused the hurricanes- 2005. Just wait until next year 2006 we are going to have our clock cleaned…. Well just wait until 2007, then you will really- really get it. When a single volcano can produce enough pollution to equal all the emissions from cars for the last 100 years. When the ice age covered about 97% of Canada some where around 10,000 years ago…. And now its not..?? How the hell did that happen? Must have been those cave man cars like on the flintstones. It makes you feel just a little small doesn’t it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ice_age#Major_ice_ages
America is best described by one word, freedom... Dwight D. Eisenhower
USA4F...Don't forget that the
January 18, 2007 - 17:23 ET by Clear thinkerUSA4F...
Don't forget that the left considers all of us as simple-minded dweebs. Forget all that stuff about volcanoes, ice ages and all that, a leftist GW Pastor has spoken!
I hear and I obey...America i
January 18, 2007 - 18:01 ET by USA4freedomI hear and I obey...
America is best described by one word, freedom... Dwight D. Eisenhower
USA4f...Don't forget to kneel
January 18, 2007 - 19:22 ET by Clear thinkerUSA4f...
Don't forget to kneel and bow head.
That's just another part of t
January 18, 2007 - 18:12 ET by mattmThat's just another part of their silencing strategy. If your just a simple-minded dweeb, they don't have to provide any proof of their outrageous claims, and they don't have to listen to your arguments.
It the same as the tactic of demonization and ridicule which Liberals use to advance their political campaigns and agenda - including the mis-named "fairness doctrine."
"Ignorance has a well-known Liberal bias." - Publius
CT How can I--
January 18, 2007 - 19:33 ET by misterbillCT How can I--forget volcanoes and all that other scare stuff? Didn't you see thay had snow in LA yesterday--stop mocking these high priests of panic. The latest thing I read(cannot remember where) is that the cold weather is one sign of GW.
KMA mister GWer.
Global warming, global coolin
January 18, 2007 - 19:36 ET by Clear thinkerGlobal warming, global cooling, it's all so confusing.
I propose we start pushing a Global Moderation alarm just to screw with people's heads.
The Global Warming Channel ..
January 18, 2007 - 18:15 ET by josephsamuelsonThe Global Warming Channel ... these wackoes won't even post pictures of winter storms for fear they might be used to refute "global" warming. I didn't think weather coverage could become biased but the GWC has proven me dead wrong.
They won't even report the record lows being set every year across Canada, the U.S., and other countries and they won't report record winter storms in Europe and Russia. It's absurd (unless you know how the MSM operates).
Decertification of Dr. Heidi Cullen
January 18, 2007 - 18:17 ET by Junk Science SkepticTo: amsmem@ametsoc.org (AMS Membership Address)
RE: Decertification of Dr. Heidi Cullen
Please consider the immediate decertification of Dr. Heidi Cullen for
her unscientific, anti-American, Stalinist proposal to penalize those
of your members who support free speech and real fact-based scientific
debate. Weather forecasting has enough credibility issues without
providing to credentials to lunatics like Cullen.
Regards,
Feel free to copy, paste and send to: amsmem@ametsoc.org
Weather forecasting has enoug
January 18, 2007 - 18:21 ET by Jack BauerWeather forecasting has enough credibility issues without
providing to credentials to lunatics like Cullen.
Oddly enough, maybe she should be certified? At the nearest loony bin.
Proud member of the all-powerful and vast militarist/industrialist/capitalist/zionist-bagelist complex
LMAO Jack...and take Algore w
January 18, 2007 - 18:24 ET by bigtimerLMAO Jack...and take Algore with her!
"If we ever forget that we are a Nation Under God....then we will be a Nation Gone Under." Ronald Reagan
I just posted this on NERC's
January 18, 2007 - 18:34 ET by danboI just posted this on NERC's challenge.
Should I send a second to AMS.
"Those who cast the votes decide nothing. Those who count the votes decide everything."
-- Joseph Stalin
blarsen
January 18, 2007 - 19:25 ET by blarsenAs a matter of fact, there are still a lot of activist scientists/doctors who say smoking can cause lung cancer. WHAT NEXT?
1) If the Kyoto Protocol addr
January 18, 2007 - 21:50 ET by Unsane1) If the Kyoto Protocol addresses a GLOBAL problem called GLOBAL warming, why are China, Mexico, and India, among other countries, exempt from it?
2) Why does the Kyoto Protocol not address, at all the issue of tropical deforestation, which is the cause of 20% of global greenhouse emissions?
3) Why no major Atlantic hurricanes this year?
4) How come the world's highest recorded temperature was recorded in 1922?
5) Why did it snow south and east of San Antonio for Christmas 2004? San Antonio RARELY if EVER gets snow.
6) Why did it snow in Lisbon and New Delhi in the winter of 2005-2006? Why did it snow in Johannesburg in July 2006 during the austral winter?
7) Exit Glacier has been melting since at least 1780. What human activity back then was causing the glacier to melt?
8) Explain the appearance of icebergs in the Chukchi Sea and the Beaufort Sea in the Barrow area at the end of July 2004.
9) Finally, I and everyone else in San Antonio would sure love to hear an explanation as to why the city iced over this past Monday - Wednesday. San Antonio is NOT supposed to get ice storms. I am NOT supposed to be chipping away anywhere from 1/8 of an inch to 1/4 of an inch of ice from my truck. I thought global warming would make events as such MORE rare!
"HAV3 TH3 BRIDG3S OF INSANITY B33N CROSS3D AND FOR3V3R R3TRACT3D???." - Meshuggah, "3ntrapm3nt", from Catch Thirty Thr33 (2005)
Isn't that just like a libera
January 18, 2007 - 19:06 ET by msh1973Why are the global warming people pushing so hard for this to be true? What do they stand to gain? Is it about funding and money?
"The urge to save humani
January 18, 2007 - 19:19 ET by danbo"The urge to save humanity is almost always a false front for the urge to rule.” H.L. Mencken
Mencken
January 18, 2007 - 19:27 ET by misterbillMencken--where is he--we need him now!
msh1973...Funding is a part o
January 18, 2007 - 19:20 ET by Clear thinkermsh1973...
Funding is a part of it, but personally I think it's Earth religion practitioners.
CT,That is an excellent answe
January 18, 2007 - 19:52 ET by msh1973CT,
That is an excellent answer, I had not thought of that before, but it makes perfect sense. Thanks.
msh, that and the almighty &q
January 18, 2007 - 19:32 ET by JABmsh, that and the almighty "POWER" they feel when they can dupe an idiot. It must feel good to be smart enough dupe a simplistic individual because they do it too often.
It is truly amazing how many STUPID people wander around this world these day's and can actually manage enough to procreate.
GAWD, it's frustrating for a thinking person to see this ongoing & inundating BS continue unabated.
"Too bad Ignorance isn't painful to the Ignorant"
What Is Wrong With The Weather Channel?
January 18, 2007 - 19:42 ET by emjem24You know, I go to the Weather Channel for the weather, not their freakin' opinions. Geez, let's now threaten meteorologists who are skeptical the junk science that is "global warming" with removing their "seal of approval." Does this chick think she's now the weather thought police? Whatever happened to the free exchange of ideas? Give me a break as John Stossel would say.
The difficult we do immediately; the impossible takes a little longer. Air Force Motto
emjem says: When your brain's stuck on liberalism it self-destructs.
On Josefina Cullen
January 18, 2007 - 21:58 ET by UnsaneAs a world renowned Canadian poet would write, "Those who know what's best for us, must rise and save us from ourselves..."
What's next for Heidi Cullen? Public pistol-whipping, beating, and shooting those who even have the slightest disagreement from her orthodoxy? Perhaps nightly rounding up of those who have the audacity of questioning GW, and having them shot in the middle of nowhere? Or even making those who do not believe in the religion of man made global warming go everywhere wearing a thermometer around their necks (the easier to mark those who have had their civil rights deprived from them)?
No doubt whose side she would be on if she were present for the murder of Hypatia and the burning of the Alexandria Library.
Doesn't it amaze you how much Leftists HATE the ever-searching, ever-questioning ways of science?
"HAV3 TH3 BRIDG3S OF INSANITY B33N CROSS3D AND FOR3V3R R3TRACT3D???." - Meshuggah, "3ntrapm3nt", from Catch Thirty Thr33 (2005)
Hooray for her!
January 18, 2007 - 22:23 ET by terrigHooray for her!
Hope you all realize I was
January 18, 2007 - 22:25 ET by terrigHope you all realize I was being a smarty pants and not seriousl! ;)
So, OK, hydrodynDm, here I am.
January 18, 2007 - 22:34 ET by acaiguanaSo, OK, hydrodynDm, here I am.
New thread.
Try again to explain how I diss'ed you.
ACa
...
Acaiguana says: "I love blind Monkeys and any inference that I am making fun of blind Monkeys would be wrong.
acaiguana, Well, maybe I've
January 18, 2007 - 22:54 ET by hydrodynDMacaiguana,
Well, maybe I've just been misinterpreting your tone. Granted we got off on the wrong foot with the "big guy" and "get a life" comments. But I dropped it.
Then there was the suggesting that I'm "ignoring" reality - funny really considering I work in a field that depends on empirical evidence. But that aside.
Then I'm told I have to "wake up" and you make the suggestion that I "either ignore [economic factors] or to pretend it isn't important". That's were the suggestion of "lying" comes in.
And the final "Quit being concerned about who sits next to you." Thanks for the condescending advice.
You know, maybe I'm just off today. Maybe I'm just taking things too seriously and am dumping on you for it. Or maybe I just don't dig the way to get your point across.
Either way, I appreciate the conversation. And good idea about moving the thread.
I too, am a bit tired, not of you, but of being on the system.
January 18, 2007 - 22:58 ET by acaiguanaI too, am a bit tired, not of you, but of being on the system.
But, I was super serious about the class and your ability to shape your mind.
Whether you like NB I care about that.
<edit - you probably don't know, but I'm a very old man - worried about our youth. And their brains (a bit North of 100 myself. end-edit>
ACA
...
Acaiguana says: "I love blind Monkeys and any inference that I am making fun of blind Monkeys would be wrong.
acaiguana, Cool. It's about
January 18, 2007 - 23:02 ET by hydrodynDMacaiguana,
Cool. It's about 11pm here and time for me to act like a responsible person and go offline.
No hard feelings - good debates are meant to have some fire in them.
Hydro
January 18, 2007 - 23:13 ET by Noel SheppardH,
Good night, and please don't be a stranger. Your views and insights are definitely welcome here. ns
Noel, Thanks for the kind w
January 18, 2007 - 23:16 ET by hydrodynDMNoel,
Thanks for the kind words.
Good night to you as well.
I blame TRex!
January 19, 2007 - 09:54 ET by Challenger GrimYes I said it! I blame the dinosaurs for our global warming woes. How DARE they die and become easy sources of energy for us to use. If they hadn't fossilized into Oil then we wouldn't be in this mess.
Oh, and I checked out the site Ms Cullen recommended. And found the following VERY interesting... (from)
Globally, surface air temperatures increased by approximately 1oF during the 20th
century. Some regions of the world have experienced much greater
warming; Alaska and the Antarctic peninsula, for example, have warmed
by approximately 4oF over the same time period. Other
regions of the world, such as the oceans of the Southern Hemisphere and
the interior of Antarctica, have not experienced warming.
(hmm... that doesn't quite seem "globally" then)
(now the entire section titled
What Accounts for the Differences in Temperatures From Measurements at
the Earth's surface and satellite measurements of the atmosphere?
is worth reading, but I love this 'answer')
A report by the National Academy of Sciences in 2000 stated that both
the surface temperature records and the satellite temperature records
possessed systematic errors that may bias the data, which account for
some of the differences between the two data records. Nevertheless,
"the warming of surface temperature that has taken place during the
past 20 years is undoubtedly real. . .
However, the National Academy of Sciences also concluded that there are
real discrepancies between the surface and satellite records, which
have yet to be sufficiently explained. It is often argued that
urbanization has increased surface temperatures at the Earth's surface
causing the surface to warm faster than the atmosphere, but surface and
satellite trends for the world's most urbanized regions (e.g., North
America and Europe) are nearly identical, indicating urbanization
cannot account for the disparity. In addition, a recent analysis
suggests that the difference between surface and satellite trends may
not be as large as previously thought, but these results remain
controversial.
(controversial? Really? Oh, and since when have you heard this?)
A number of current models do a reasonable job of simulating past
climate variability (decades to centuries), but all such models perform
poorly at modeling short-term climate variability (days-years) and
regional climate variability.
(oh, and don't forget:)
The projections of climate models are also highly dependent upon the
assumptions used regarding future trends in greenhouse gas emissions
and atmospheric concentrations.
(keep in mind the above when you read the following)
The latest Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change projections for 21st century average global temperature increase is 2.5-10.4oF, based upon multiple climate models and multiple assumptions regarding future greenhouse gas emissions.
(the whole page is worth reading [if you need a laugh] but I thought I'd wrap it all up with this little tidbit)
What are the Projected Impacts of Climate Change?
changing climate, but will differ in their degree of success.
Ecosystem productivity may decrease or increase, at least over the
short-term.
significant impacts on water resources, either reducing or increasing
water availability along with increasing the risk of floods or droughts.
will interact with coastal storms to erode beaches, inundate land, and
damage structures.
with moderate warming, with increases in productivity likely in
northern states and possible declines in southern states. However, at
higher magnitudes of warming, the risk of more uniform adverse effects
across the nation increases.
mechanisms including extreme temperatures (i.e., heat waves),
exacerbation of air pollution, severe weather, and increased spread of
infectious diseases.
Again, does NOBODY see the laugh with climate change causing BOTH opposite affects? (droughts AND floods? decreased AND increased productivity? a Democrat AND Republican president [at the same time]?) Geez whiz mr wizard, what CAN'T global warming do?
4* in 100 years in the antarc
January 19, 2007 - 10:37 ET by danbo4* in 100 years in the antarctic? Ahh. Did we have a weather station down there in 1907? Where are they getting this information. Kind of glanced for old records down there. Found these:
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/cgi-bin/gistemp/gistemp_station.py?id=700890620000&data_set=1&num_neighbors=1
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/cgi-bin/gistemp/gistemp_station.py?id=700890220008&data_set=1&num_neighbors=1
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/cgi-bin/gistemp/gistemp_station.py?id=700890620000&data_set=1&num_neighbors=1
Must have been
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/cgi-bin/gistemp/gistemp_station.py?id=304890560008&data_set=1&num_neighbors=1
or
http://data.giss.nasa.gov/cgi-bin/gistemp/gistemp_station.py?id=700890500008&data_set=1&num_neighbors=1
That's a whole degree in 40 years.
"The urge to save humanity is almost always a false front for the urge to rule.” H.L. Mencken
For laughs
January 19, 2007 - 10:48 ET by Challenger GrimSomeone posted a comment related to this article on another board that I just HAD to quote here because it's so priceless.
Uh... Heidi - THEY DO rotate clockwise in the Southern Hemisphere. (snicker)
(as to tsunamis; everyone 'knows' those are caused by Poseidon, on orders from Zeus.)
posted on 01/19/2007 8:38:03 AM CST by Condor51
Cullen needs to read Professo
January 19, 2007 - 10:18 ET by JABCullen needs to read Professor Nigel Weiss's Opinion before opening her mouth.
"Too bad Ignorance isn't painful to the Ignorant"