Wednesday, January 17, 2007

Disagree with global warming alarmism? Get a new job!

The Weather Channel's Heidi Cullen, host of the weekly global warming show "The Climate Code" has made a call for meteorologists who deny man-made global warming to be stripped of the professional credentials. Dr. Cullen:

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's just an incorrect statement.

Maybe to you.

The problem with global warming "science," besides the obvious, is that it is for the large part justified by a "wide scientific consensus." Consensus science is a ridiculous answer to any scientific question, considering any previous "wide scientific consensus" (Earth is flat, center of the solar system, etc.) Consensus science is only amplified by those who consider their rightness paramount to the point where they need to intimidate those who disagree with the "consensus." This isn't science - it's scientific fascism.


The Big Ticket said...

I was actually randomly discussing global warming with my colleagues at work the other day and I supported the idea that we don't have a large enough sample size to indicate any substantial claim. I've seen global warming "experts" refer to the last decade as being evidence of increasing erratic climate behavior and increasing temperatures, so I did the math and figured that an appropriate proportional analogy would be: if you lived to be 100 years old and judged the climate change during the span of just over one second at any point in your lifetime, would you possibly claim manmade global warming? Of course not. Now, you've often quoted sources discussing the climate since the late 1800's, so that would up the sample to about 11 seconds during that 100 years of living, making it almost possible to conclude some type of temperature change, but not unlike how many other 11 second spans throughout your lifetime you experienced increasing or decreasing temperature.

Additionally, while back in Iowa for Christmas I was telling my family about how some residents in Southern CA are seeing snow for the first time, my sister jumped in and informed us that it is very unseasonably mild in the NorthEastern states, following up with "that's global warming for you." Of course, after recently reading some of the material linked on this blog and due to my inherent skepticism, I countered with something about how that has yet to be proven. The rest of the "debate":

"Kelly, I've read plenty of articles on the matter."
(Me laughing) "I have too, Kristin."
"I think I'd know as an expert in my professional field."
(Me rolling my eyes and just dropping it completely.)

I went the high road and refrained from attacking her ego. Since when did working in a museum make you a scientist? As PR director, does lining up interviews with experts in their fields make you one? As possibly the most illogical left-winger I know, if I were to test her "expertise" by asking why it has been snowing here in West Texas more than in many years, she'd give me the usual response about how global warming doesn't just make temps warmer but also causes erratic climate including snow in unusual places, but of course not able to tell me WHY. She is certainly a victim of what you call "consensus science."

(I'll note that this morning an older co-worker of mine responded to my winter weather inquiry by telling me about how it reminds him of a big snowfall back in the 80's. But the worst snow storm he's seen in these parts happened back in the 60's. Funny how global warming must by cyclical...)

radar said...

One of the biggest problems with global warming "science" is that all weather phenomenon confirms the hypothesis. The coldest winter, the lack of strong hurricanes, the storm in Europe, and the snow in Texas and California (along with it being unseasonably warm TODAY) all corroborate global warming. Because global warming causes...everything!

You should tell Kristin I wrote it and send her a link or too...