John Coleman is the founder of the weather channel. He has studied climate and weather for many years. Recently, he called the global warming movement a “scam” on his blog. His article is Linked Here from ICECAP. Will anyone listen to John Coleman ?
I just discovered the ICECAP website. It looks informative and I encourage people to visit the site.
I also came across this very interesting lecture from Bob Carter, an Australian research professor. You can listen to his fascinating lecture (37 minutes in length), presented in Sept, 2007, in 4 parts at these Links.
Here is a related article by Professor Carter entitled: ” The Myth of Dangerous Human-Caused Climate Change”.
I’m happy to so that someone has the guts to oppose the “consensus” in regard to man’s influence on global warming.
Here are two very good web pages:
www.junkscience.com
www.climatepolice.com
Lots and lots of good reading.
WH
Tom: Of John Coleman, you claim “He is himself an expert in weather analysis.” He was a weather forcaster who started the Weather Channel. We know that many weather forcasters do pick up a lot of knowledge of weather, but we also know that many are entertainers who depend heavily on the expertise of others, and who do more reading and practicing of scripts and National Weather forecasts than they do original analysis.
Did Mr. Coleman have advanced degrees in climate science? (Which is different from, but related to, meteorology….) When he founded the Weather Channel, was he acting more as a businessman who depended on the analysis of others, or was he the brains behind it all, or…? In other words, are his credentials actually of the kind that we should trust on this issue?
You have on at least one occasion mentioned a TV film shown in the UK called “The Great Global Warming Swindle.” Here’s something I found about that film at Sourcewatch:
………………………..
“The Great Global Warming Swindle is a television program advocating the common arguments by anthropogenic global warming skeptics. It was broadcast on March 8, 2007 on Channel 4 in the United Kingdom. It was subsequently broadcast by the Australian Broadcasting Corporation in July 2007.
“The film’s writer and director, Martin Durkin, believes that ‘global warming is a hoax foisted upon an unsuspecting public by conspiratorial environmentalists,’ reported The Age in June 2007. Durkin previously made the anti-environmental film ‘Against Nature,’ which Britain’s Channel 4 had to issue a public apology for, ‘because it misled interviewees and distorted the editing of their contributions.’ Other films by Durkin praise genetically modified food and silicone breast implants. [1]
“Oceanographer Carl Wunsch ‘complained he had been misled’ with regard to ‘The Great Global Warming Swindle.’ He claimed that his interview ‘had been edited to look as though he was dismissing human-caused climate change.’ [2]
………………
Reminds me of Dennis Avery, who has a book that claims organic food is not as good for you as that which is grown with chemical fertilizer, herbicide and pesticide. I wonder if director Martin Durkin believes silicone breast implants are healthier than natural breasts? (0; Doesn’t sound like he’s a scientific consensus-building sort of guy.
I lived in Chicago when John Coleman was the weatherman there. He was a “nice guy”…but, a terrible weatherman. He was locally thought of as a kind of well-liked “kook” who was reliable only for being wrong about the weather.
He did have the luck/vision to register weather.com as a URL, but he is very far from being a weather expert or scientist.
As someone who grew up as a Republican and still has more “conservative” beliefs, I urge you guys to stop with the fractious approaches you are taking to life/politics. Tom, gay marriage isn’t causing global warming, nor is immigration. But, if you found an article saying that they were, would you link to it from your blog? Climate change is happening.
I hope you take note that it is Republicans like me, who look at the world with an open mind, critical analysis and a dogged dedication to freedom that see the costs of ignorance being realized. We will be cleaning up the party to remove the ultra-conservatives like you who have lost their sense of what it means to be a Republican. It is not Republican to simply be pro-business, pro-money at all costs.
Weldon:
Here’s a bit below from Sourcewatch regarding Steven J. Milvoy of JunkScience. Do you think he has no conflicts of interest, and can be a trusted and unbiased source? Read and consider:
……………………………………
Steven J. Milloy is a columnist for Fox News and a paid advocate for Phillip Morris, ExxonMobil and other corporations. From the 1990s until the end of 2005, he was an adjunct scholar at the libertarian think tank the Cato Institute.
Milloy runs the website Junkscience.com, which is dedicated to debunking what he alleges to be false claims regarding global warming, DDT, environmental radicalism and scare science among other topics.[1] His other website, CSR Watch.com, is focused around attacking the corporate social responsibility movement. He is also head of the Free Enterprise Action Fund, a mutual fund he runs with tobacco executive Tom Borelli, who happens to be listed as the secretary of the Advancement of Sound Science Center, an organisation Milloy operates from his home in Potomac, Maryland .
Milloy holds a B.A. in Natural Sciences from the Johns Hopkins University, a Master of Health Sciences in Biostatistics from the Johns Hopkins University School of Hygiene and Public Health, a Juris Doctorate from the University of Baltimore, and a Master of Laws from the Georgetown University Law Center.[2]
In January 2006, Paul D. Thacker reported in The New Republic that Milloy has received thousands of dollars in payments from the Phillip Morris company since the early nineties, and that NGOs controlled by Milloy have received large payments from ExxonMobil [3]. A spokesperson for Fox News stated, “Fox News was unaware of Milloy’s connection with Philip Morris. Any affiliation he had should have been disclosed.”
….
(Sourcewatch)
My question to you, Senator Neuville, is why don’t you listen to many thousands of *qualified* scientists who voice their opinion that is contrary to Coleman’s?
It is always interesting to see how readily many attack the messenger rather that the message.
Why aren’t the attacks on Algore? What is his qualification as an expert.
John Coleman stated in his statement that after reading articles and consulting with experts in the field he came to his conclusion. Doesn’t that fit Algore?
Regarding numbers, this page lists 19,000 scientists, by name, that have expressed their opinion of man induced climate change.
http://www.oism.org/pproject/
WH
Weldon Hogie,
My intent is not to attack Mr. Coleman. If he’s not qualified, he’s not qualified. Al Gore isn’t qualified either–so I wouldn’t suggest listening to him either.
What I suggest is listening to qualified scientists who have their research published in peer-reviewed, scholarly journals. They are the ones warning us about global warming, but all too often they are the ones ignored by skeptics in favor of biased blog writers.
As for the OISM and their Oregon Petition, you might want to checked your definition of “scientist.” Geraldine Halliwell, the Spice Girl? Micheal J. Fox, the actor? “Graybeal & Sayre, Inc.”? Raises some eyebrows. Indeed, Scientific America tried to at least verify a few of 1,400 listed Ph.D.s and extrapolated from their review that only about 200 climate researchers make up the core of the petition. Not very much in the field of climatology.
Senator Neuville,
Maybe a more pertinent question is why you don’t believe or chose to ignore the 2500 climate scientists who actually practice peer-reviewed science and have come to the consensus that anthropegenic global warming is real.
But that’s the great thing about blogs, any fool (being an elected one helps) can say whatever they want to add to the confusion.