Home > AGW, Climate Change, Data, Global Warming, Omniclimate, Skepticism > Why Are Weather Forecasters Skeptical of AGW?

Why Are Weather Forecasters Skeptical of AGW?

An interesting topic via the Global Warming blog on Accuweather, where Brett Anderson points to an article by Bill Dawson of The Yale Forum on Climate Change and the Media.

Note in a couple of Dawson’s interviewees, a slight-but-steady series of slurs against weathercasters that don’t buy into the AGW faith:

Broadcast meteorologists are so busy disseminating information about near-term weather conditions[…] that they simply don’t have much time to keep up with scientific developments related to longer-term climate conditions

many “naysayers” […] are coming from a perspective of the policy first

they’re against it because they think it will hurt the economy

[the “naysayers”] are putting their own personal views – sometimes even fundamentalist religious beliefs – first

[they] have no academic training or degrees in meteorology

=======

Luckily, Messrs Anderson and Dawson don’t engage in such awful rhetoric, with the former publicly declaring

“from what I personally see, there are also a number of current and retired TV meteorologists with a good deal of atmospheric science eduaction/professional background that are also skeptical about man-made global warming”

Myself, I have a weather forecasting background…who knows, that might explain my skepticism about AGW…in any case, I find it natural to respect people whose forecasts are challenged by thousands of viewers against the hard evidence of each day’s weather.

Advertisements
  1. 2009/12/08 at 11:55

    While I don’t buy into climate change as a direct result of fossil fuels, I KNOW that environmental damage, degradation and abuse that arise from Industrial Societies processes is causing untold harm TODAY, now, and has been for a long time…. The same people, in Government and in Industry, who use war as a tool of policy, also create poverty and … See Morefamine by their policies, which are NOT included as part of the Climate debate at Government level…. and few in the climate movement dare to bring these subjects up for analysis or discussion.

    The relationship between industrial society and nature is one of abuse, control and conceit, as much as the relationship between the slaves taken from Africa and those who took them, as much as the workers in Chinese factories and those who employ them, as much as the transfer of dirty technology to China was a direct result of a combination of Eco-activism in the US, the desire to maximise profits with cheap labour….

    It would appear that most of the people who were part of Seattle, Genoa etc etc and who were part of the international anti-war movement have been side lined by a well orchestrated media/government campaign that has taken their eyes of the ball…. See More

    Inability to resist peer pressure is one of the results of conditioning – activist who do not address their own conditioning can and will be manipulated.

  2. paulm
    2008/11/24 at 03:27

    Information Statement of the American Meteorological Society
    Climate Change

    Despite the uncertainties noted above, there is adequate evidence from observations and interpretations of climate simulations to conclude that the atmosphere, ocean, and land surface are warming; that humans have significantly contributed to this change; and that further climate change will continue to have important impacts on human societies, on economies, on ecosystems, and on wildlife through the 21st century and beyond.

    I think they have a chip on their shoulders. Why they do not discuss long term trends in the weather and its impact on us is a mystery. They should highlight both sides of the story, ie cyclic systems etc.. I just cant see how such a large body of scientific professionals (Unofficially) can deny that there is not a trend in the climate.

    Global Temperature Record
    http://www.cru.uea.ac.uk/cru/info/warming/

  3. krissmith777
    2008/06/19 at 18:07

    I really love this part:

    ]the “naysayers”] are putting their own personal views – sometimes even fundamentalist religious beliefs.”

    That was just rich. What the hell does religion have to do with it? Come on.

  4. anonymous
    2008/06/19 at 10:13

    I’ve wondered about this issue myself. Who gets more practice at critical thinking — a research scientist whose living depends on writing successful grant applications; or a meteorologist who is constantly trying to predict next week’s weather?

    Seems to me that to succeed as a research scientist, you need only be good at drinking kool-aid. Very few research scientists actually propose bold, new ideas.

    Personally, I’m an attorney and I get lied to all day long by people and entities, big and small. Based just on my professional experience, global warming — as it is normally defined — sounds like major BS.

  1. No trackbacks yet.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: