InvestorsHub Logo
Boards
News
Market Data
Markets
Discover
Discover
Subscribe Login/Register
S&P 500
5,127.79
(
1.26%
)
US TECH 100
17,446.00
(
2.17%
)
Dow Jones
38,675.68
(
1.18%
)
Brent Oil
82.77
(
0.00%
)
Bitcoin
63,678.07
(
-0.34%
)
Post# of 549
Next 10
Reply Private New
Public Reply Private Reply New Post
Keep Last Read
Keep Next 10 Report Keyboard Shortcuts
Next 10 Prev Next

Razorbucks

Send PM Follow Ignore
Followers 13
Posts 4198
Boards Moderated 0
Alias Born 03/17/2006

Razorbucks

Re: None

Wednesday, 05/02/2007 9:52:26 PM

Wednesday, May 02, 2007 9:52:26 PM

Post# of 549
In the "doomsday" global warming "debate",

(1) why is it acceptable to liberals that a "Climatological Expert" (with a degree in theology) on The Weather Channel can go McCarthy on anyone that disagrees with her drama should have their certifications pulled?

“If a meteorologist has an AMS [American Meteorological
Society] 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 . . . . 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 . . . It’s not a political statement . . . it’s just an incorrect statement.”


As if this "expert" can unequivocally declare the cause of "global warming" as she can declare which way a hurricane rotates, which can be seen! Absurd! It looks as though someone needs to go back to school to learn how compare like-things.

http://www.greg-strange.com/Weather_Channel_Heidi_Cullen.html
http://www.nationalledger.com/cgi-bin/artman/exec/view.cgi?archive=8&num=11117

Here she is, in all of her glory:
http://climate.weather.com/onair.html

Her show seems to be more about Hollywood drama. When I watch another series, "Storm Stories" on The Weather Channel, I've noticed some of the stories have scenes where they blur or shake the camera to cause more of an emotional effect - a drama for their story. Then, the wilder the story, the better. It's all about entertainment and drama, not the facts. Is it The Weather Channel or The Hollywood Channel?

On with the questions --

(2) Are the Martian vehicles the cause of global warming on Mars? Are the Martians using too much toilet paper (Sheryl Crow)? Too many Martian animals flatulating (Gore)?

Look at how absurd! Look at the drama! Toilet Paper? Cow Flatulence? And, lastly, driving off-road vehicles in Africa all cause global warming! We better get in our pods! I wonder if the Martians have an Al Gore of their own that in pure emotion announces the destruction of Mars as he travels in his jet around the globe, creating more Carbon Dioxide.

(3) Why do global alarmists never deal with solar cycles or talk about the sun?

(4) What happened to the global cooling dramatists in the 1970s?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Global_cooling

(5) Is something only open to discussion if you disagree with the topic? Is the thought police coming soon?

I didn't even deal much with Al Gore and his hysterical story about the coming Armageddon! 9 more years until world destruction!

Public Reply Private Reply New Post
Keep Last Read
Keep Last Read Next 10 Report Keyboard Shortcuts
Next 10 Prev Next

Join the InvestorsHub Community

Register for free to join our community of investors and share your ideas. You will also get access to streaming quotes, interactive charts, trades, portfolio, live options flow and more tools.

Sign Up