Video: CNN meteorologist calls global-warming hysteria “arrogant” »
Posted By pc25 1 year ago in NewsNotable, I’d say, both for the source and the sentiment. On CNN last night, meteorologist Chad Myers discussed the record snowfall and cold in Las Vegas with Lou Dobbs, who asked him what this had to say about global warming. Myers compared the research models to analyzing the reliability of a three-day-old car:
Read Full Story at hotair.com »
4275 Views Share Story 44 Comments Report
Who Also Submitted: All »
RSS Join the Discussion
+ Add CommentComments So Far: 183 (view all)
-
69%
pc251 year ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
FTA
Reply
where dissenters are cast as modern heretics and DEBATE IS REJECTED. It’s GALILEO IN REVERSE, where scientists who dispute both the models and the data LOSE PATRONAGE AND FUNDING, not because they’re wrong, but because they THREATEN THE CASH COW that the global-warming religion promises to researchers for the next couple of decades. -
71%
CactusAnnie1 year ago
-
-
-
38%
wtagg1 year ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Are you now saying that CNN is a reliable news source?
Reply
Just as it is impossible to determine if it is occurring and the possible causes with limited data, it also goes in the other direction. Such limited data does not determine that it isn't occurring. One hot year does not make a case for global warming, just as one cold year doesn't debunk it.
Then again, to not conserve is not conservative. Are you a conservative? -
100%
reidgator1 year ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
What many are missing in this debate (from both sides) is that there are TWO QUESTIONS of importance.
Reply
(1) "Is the planet warming?"
(2) "If so, is it warming because of our behavior?"
The answer to the first question is : YES!!!!
For the past 10,000 years, the Earth has been slowly working its way out of the last ice age, with a few retreats backward. The last major chills were in the late 18th century (think 1770s) and early 19th century (1811-1814 I believe).
As warm as it is now, it is not as warm as it was in the 14th century.
If we survived then, I believe we have a good shot now.
But, we still have not answered or addressed the second question!
That data is even less convincing than the data for the 1st question. -
-
75%
Tangent0011 year ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Debate is not rejected. Stomping one's foot and hollering "IS NOT!" isn't debate, it's denial. Present your data! That's how science works.
Reply
BTW, climatologists aren't getting rich over this. Research dollars are always scarce so I have no idea where you are getting this notion that global warming is a huge 'cash cow'. -
-
-
0%
hyperbola1 year ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Sounding ever more hard up for silly propaganda PC!
Reply
CLIMATE CHANGE: Chasm Widens Between Science and Policy
QUEBEC CITY, Canada, Dec 15 (IPS) - The roof of our house is on fire while the leaders of our family sit comfortably in the living room below preoccupied with "political realities" -- that was essentially the message from 1,000 scientists from around the world along with northern indigenous leaders gathered in Quebec City for the International Arctic Change conference that concluded last weekend.
"Climate change and its impacts are accelerating at unexpected rates with global consequences," delegates warned in a statement.
Presenting data from hundreds of studies and research projects detailing the Arctic region's rapid meltdown and cascading ecological impacts, participants urged governments to take "immediate measures to reduce greenhouse gas emissions". ...
...In chance hallway encounters in Quebec City, scientists -- strictly off the record for fear of losing funding -- said climate change is happening far faster and is having much larger impacts than they ever imagined.
"Climate change will be an overwhelming global tragedy without major reductions now," said one Canadian expert. ...
http://www.ipsnews.net/news.asp?idnews=45121
-
-
-
-
85%
k9kssr1 year ago
-
80%
mivan41 year ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Who is going to take responsibility for the Deer, Bears, cats, dogs and all the other animals? Just how does raising taxes on cows help reduce emissions anyway? And how much more petro chemical fertilizer would we have to use to offset the loss of cow fertilizer (assuming we delete cows from existence ). AND how much would this added chemical fertilizer damage the environment?-more than the cows I bet since the cows are natural. Man made global warming is a farce (all the planets in the solar system are following the same heating and cooling curve which actually has been cooling for the last several years!), but still we should not waste resources like we do since it does add to other pollution. Remember when the Goracle said that bio fuels were the answer and cast the deciding vote with a dead locked Senate to fund and require bio fuel usage ? Remember what the final result was? ( Increased emissions-turns out bio-fuels create more emissions than burning fossil fuels and starves people too! ) We need NOT jump on the bandwagon again until we ARE allot more sure what direction is the right direction. One thing we DO know is personal conservation does work and doesn't have any Negative side effects. OOPS Mr. Gore you had better downsize NOW!
Reply
-
-
flyonthewallzzComment removed: Spam
-
flyonthewallzzComment removed: Spam
-
100%
flyonthewallzz1 year ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
http://apod.nasa.gov/apod/image/0011/earthlights2_...
Reply
hmm... this is my third try. -
100%
flyonthewallzz1 year ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
let my try it this way:
Reply
http://apod.nasa.gov/apod/image/0011/earthlights2_...-
RRconComment removed: Spammer, Hard Banned
-
-
flyonthewallzzComment removed: Spam
-
flyonthewallzzComment removed: Spam
-
-
-
flyonthewallzzComment removed: Spam
-
-
100%
CactusAnnie1 year ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
You're never a pest, you are the only fly I really like! I must admit, there were certain occasions when I wanted to be a fly on the wall, too.
Reply
I had some posts earlier today that didn't show up for quite some time after I had posted them.
-
-
RRconComment removed: Spammer, Hard Banned46 Replies
-
-
92%
GehlLady1 year ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
I am totally for conservation, going as green as possible, but it's a respect for Mother Nature thing. I don't care for big cities, or dirty lakes and rivers. Science has never been my strong point, so I've been staying out of the debate. I've seen a lot of the programs on National Geographic, Discovery, about the glacier melts. I also know from my own experience the summers in Florida have been milder than 8-9 years ago.
Reply
RRcon, do you have some references that are in more layman terms you could share? Thanks, most of what I find is in support of global warming, or too technical for me to easily understand. -
50%
philomath1 year ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
There sure are a lot of simpletons (such as the CNN meteorologist and several contributors to this site) commenting on global warming. Snow in Las Vegas doesn't disprove climate change. Indeed it could be constued as further evidence of climate change. As our weather systems are disrupted, it doesn't mean every place will be hotter. It means that swings in the weather will be more pronounced. So for all you deniers who cite a snowstorm in an unaccustomed place as proof that global warming is a myth or a liberal plot to control energy, you are just showing your ignorance.
Reply-
70%
buckncindykill1 year ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
In this case, the cold and nasty winter weather this year was pushed in our faces by the GW crowd as a result of a natural, cyclic phenomena; El Nino. While also suggesting that all this cooling is also a result of GW or in your case, climate change. Now that is ignorant. The atmospheric gyrations from year to year and decade to decade are indeed cyclic, especially when sun activity increases or decreases, i.e. the maunder minimum.
Reply
You boldly call GW skeptics "simpletons", when you yourself offer no intrinsic logic to substantiate your own claims. Ignorance is everyone's forte, but in your case I'll make an exception, due to your inability to instill critical pedagogy into a very scientific analysis that sheds light on the nonsense of anthropogenic warming.
-
-
ekklesiawarriorComment removed: Hard Banned6 Replies
-
67%
davidblinnrn1 year ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Simpleton really. Hey philomath. If you are so set on "warming up" you better get ready for the big chill. Maybe you just don't understand the real problem lurking withglobal warming problem. How about if the ice caps melt and change the salinity of the oceans? Check out the ice age when the Atlantic Ocean reverses its flow.
Reply -
-
-
56%
thecprguy1 year ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
For all the GW folks on here, I suggest you get off the computer. You're part of the problem. The computer is either plugged into the wall or you charged the laptop battery by plugging it into the wall, thereby causing carbon to be released into the atmosphere by your use of electricity. Also, I hope you've turned in your vehicle,gotten rid of all electric powered items in the home,don't eat any meat products,don't use those new lightbulbs(theyre infested with mercury which is a HIGHLY toxic substance),no books theyre probably not recycled paper, etc etc etc etc
Reply -
-
67%
AnteUp1 year ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Make me laugh! Don't you folks ever get suspicious
Reply
when the "authority" has a name like the Heartland Institute?
Check out the interests driving such "common sense - sound-science" opinions..........Oh, and light up a few
cigs and puff away while you are at it - because smoking
isn't unhealthy......or so THEY say!
Study up on the Heartland Institute:
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?title=Heartla...-
Shankari25Comment removed: Retracted by user
-
-
67%
CrazyDiamond1 year ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
We all know CNN is the foremost authority in this matter, far superior to these people" we also know hotair.com is just that, hot air....
Reply
http://www.nccs.gov/leadership-science/climate/
http://nccw.usgs.gov/ -
71%
4thchance1 year ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Sure seems to me we are cooling back down. Experts say the south pole ice cap is and has been growing back for the last two years. Seems we're having extreme cold winters here and around the world over the last few years. But ask any environmentalists. They say, the Global Cooling we are going through now, is actually part of Global Warming. Just like, Left is actually Right, Up is actually Down, and Black is actually White!
Reply-
67%
Tangent0011 year ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
"Experts say the south pole ice cap is and has been growing back for the last two years. "
Reply
Which experts would those be? From what I've read, the Northern ice cap has been melting further each summer, even to the extent of opening the Northwest passage. -
-
50%
4thchance1 year ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
All one needs to do is remember back and keep in mind this.
Reply
In the late 1970s/early 1980s we were going through a trend of GLOBAL COOLING back then.
Guess what?
The environmentalists back THEN were saying that (((Global Cooling is all do to mans pollution))).
I say, you environmentalists CAN'T HAVE IT BOTH WAYS! So just shut up. -
100%
CajunChamp1 year ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Global Warming, a simple definition: an increase in the average temperature of the earth's atmosphere (especially a sustained increase that causes climatic changes).
Reply
This does not mean that there will be 12 months of hot weather. There are numerous climate variables at play in the total scheme of Global Warming, not just 6 feet of snow in New York or 90degrees in Miami in the middle of winter.
.
-
-
67%
zalleyne21 year ago
This comment is below the standard viewing threshold View It »
Global warming does not mean that all places will experience the same effect. The North and South Poles will experience the "warming effect" meaning melting glaciers and reduced glacial mass, while areas that were once warm or experienced less heat, will surely undergo a concommitant decrease in temps, and as we have seen, snow in areas that traditionally have received no snow, for exaomple the South and Western areas of US! There have been reports of snow in SOuth Africa for the past 2 years! One may reference the "regression to the mean" concept, where the mean can shift based on the population demographics!
Reply
Add a Comment
Sign In With Your Propeller Account
Please keep your comments relevant to this story.
To create a live link, simply type the URL (including http://) or email address and we will make it a live link for you. You can put up to 3 URLs in your comments. Line breaks and paragraphs are automatically converted — no need to use <p> or <br /> tags.