so what u think about this?
http://www.glennbeck.com/news/11092007b.shtml
2007-11-12 12:29:06 · 12 answers · asked by Anonymous in Environment ➔ Global Warming
I'm amazed by Bob's answer. First he cuts down Mr. Beck because "The guy isn't a scientist, much less a climatologist. He has no evidence. He's just doing some political ranting."
Then he says we should believe global warming because Newt Gingrich says it's real.
I don't think Newt is a scientist much less a climatologist, but since he says it's real, then we should all follow him. Clearly Newt isn't doing some political ranting.
I find this to be a faulty premise, but then global warming is all about faulty premises.
2007-11-12 14:33:23 · answer #1 · answered by Dr Jello 7 · 5⤊ 4⤋
It's interesting that you should choose John Coleman. If I was looking for someone to add credibility to an argument against manmade global warming he wouldn't be the first person I'd choose.
Certainly he's an educated person and a fine meteorologist, he also knows a good deal about climate change but he's not an expert on the subject. There are overlaps betwen the disciplines of climatology and meteorology but they are two separate subjects.
Although he founded the Weather Channel his opinion is completely at odds with that of the channel. The Weather Channel's official statement on climate change states "...the majority of the warming over the past century is a result of human activities. This is also the conclusion drawn, nearly unanimously, by climate scientists. Any meaningful debate on the topic amongst climate experts is over."
The wording is a bit unfortunate as it kicks Coleman in the teeth and rejects him as being an expert", perhaps not the kindest way to treat your founder. From what I can gather he is isolated amongst the other metoerologists at the Weather Channel who unanimously agree that current climate change is primarily human induced.
I don't know why Mr Coleman should go against his own channel, profession and the world's leading experts on the subject. Perhaps it's because, as one staff member commented "he's gone senile".
http://climate.weather.com/globalWarmingStatement.html
http://climate.weather.com/science/globalwarming/
- - - - - - - - -
To answer Enraged P's question (above) regarding the number of papers Mr Coleman has written - he hasn't written any.
2007-11-12 23:27:57 · answer #2 · answered by Trevor 7 · 1⤊ 4⤋
"I have read dozens of scientific papers. I have talked with numerous scientists. I have studied. I have thought about it. I know I am correct."
Lol. That is not something an intellectually honest person with a passion for the truth says.
Being skeptical about scientific theories is fine, it's great, in fact. Saying stuff like that is ridiculous. Coleman ought to be ashamed of himself.
Also, as a side note, I am curious to know how many peer reviewed papers Mr. Coleman has authored on the subject of atmospheric science. If anyone could tell me I'd be much obliged.
2007-11-12 22:41:12 · answer #3 · answered by SomeGuy 6 · 3⤊ 2⤋
This is ludicrous! Fine the mid 1930's had the highest temperature on record....on record! On record does not mean that was the beginning of global warming, it means it was just a freakishly hot year.
A wheatherman studies wheather not the ozone layer, not the polar ice caps, and definately long term affects of progressive warming.
He lost me when he said it was a scam. It has too much proof to be a scam. You go to the polar ice caps and you can see them falling away before your eyes!
For that matter, why even critique the conservatism we are creating. It's better for people to be aware and produce new technology, rather than become ignorant and utter fools.
2007-11-12 21:05:59 · answer #4 · answered by Max 4 · 3⤊ 3⤋
Just because some disagree does not make it a scam. To be a scam the people who support it have to do so knowing that it is false. They do not know any such thing. They truly believe it is a big problem. Therefore, even if they are totally wrong, it is not a scam.
2007-11-12 22:26:31 · answer #5 · answered by campbelp2002 7 · 2⤊ 2⤋
I see a lot of the same answers from the global warming people:
"Wait, he is not right because it doesn't fit in with my beliefs. It can't be right. Same on you for posting this."
That about sums up the responses.
2007-11-12 21:32:15 · answer #6 · answered by enicolls25 3 · 0⤊ 3⤋
i am an ambientalist and global warming is a fenomem that cause severe climate change in earth. Humans cause it about the carbon dioxeded. if you are more intrested see An incovinient thruth.
2007-11-12 21:00:27 · answer #7 · answered by raquel_rodriz 1 · 1⤊ 3⤋
Right, everyone. Let's stop listening to any other side of the issue.
The debate is over. Now please, all of you believers in man-made GW start practicing what you preach. Cessation of all computer usage will dramatically diminish your carbon footprint.
2007-11-12 21:31:26 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 3⤋
This guy is all over Yahoo 10x over. I think he's had his 15 minutes of fame, let's move on and listen to someone who relies on real facts.
2007-11-12 21:09:29 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 3⤋
Give me a break. The guy isn't a scientist, much less a climatologist. He has no evidence. He's just doing some political ranting. "Dastardly"? "Whackos"?
Why would anybody intelligent believe him instead of thousands of Ph.D. scientists, backed by a massive database?
Glenn Beck is a conservative. Maybe he should listen to Newt:
"Former Republican House Speaker Newt Gingrich challenged fellow conservatives to stop resisting scientific evidence of global warming"
Good websites for actual scientific info:
http://profend.com/global-warming/
http://environment.newscientist.com/channel/earth/dn11462
http://www.ucsusa.org/global_warming/science/
http://www.realclimate.org
"climate science from climate scientists"
2007-11-12 21:00:57 · answer #10 · answered by Bob 7 · 3⤊ 7⤋