Posted on 11/07/2007 8:25:59 PM PST by tcrlaf
Very well stated!! I have a Masters degree in Biology and I agree 100% with you. I teach a General Biology course for non-majors in our local community college and I try at least to let my students know that the theory of GW has just as many adversaries as proponents. Our Administration frowns on our talking about anything political in class, but I always use the “GW consensus” as an example when I am talking about the scientific method. I emphasize that they need to examine the evidence and draw their own conclusions rather than blindly believing whatever they hear or read in the MSM.
Coleman probably wouldn’t be anyone’s first choice as a spokesman for their cause. I remember John from his days in Chicago as the clown prince of weathermen.
In the meantime, trillions of dollars will be wasted because of it.
You’re kidding me. That’s the same John Coleman?
Yes, Coleman was somewhat of a joke. If other forecasters in Chicago were calling for snow flurries, Coleman would say 1-3 inches. If others were saying 1-3 he would call for 5-8. When nothing close to his prognostications came about, he would say “we missed another big one.” He even showed a chart of hits and misses of snowstorms. The misses far outnumbered the hits because the chart was based on his predictions. After moving from WLS, the ABC outlet in Chicago, to Good Morning America, he only lasted a couple of years before they got rid of him.
Jerry Taff replaced him at WLS and I remember Jerry saying one evening that the today’s weather was a big surprise if you watched last night’s forecast. LOL An honest self-appraisal.
"She earned a bachelor's degree in Near Eastern religions and history from Juniata College before going to Columbia University for a bachelor's in engineering and operations research and a Ph.D. in climate variability."
So unlike legitimate meteorologists, Cullen was schooled in mysticism and then in the specific "study" of "climate change".
"As a climate scientist as well as a journalist, Cullen recognizes that, despite overwhelming scientific consensus regarding climate change, there is the journalistic need to provide equal time to dissenting opinions. Unfortunately, this often leads to confusion on the part of the public and justifies inaction on the part of elected officials and legislators."
So balanced coverage leads to "confusion" and justifies "inaction" by politicians. What a perfect synopsis of propaganda masquerading as journalism on the left.
~~ AGW™ ping~~
ping
LOL! Very true.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.