« Home | Flipping faster than a flapjack » | Undermining Science » | Jimmy Carter: Terrorism is A-OK » | Nail on the Head » | 100 hours of hypocrisy and obnoxiousness » | Fun with statistics » | UVa destroys Gonzaga; Final Four in their future? » | UVa is producing some leaders » | What are they smoking? » | Gerald Ford, RIP »

January 19, 2007

A meteorologist finally chimes in

James Spann, a meterologist from Alabama has chimed in on the global warming debate because of Heidi Cullen's statements, and he's blowing the lid off of the work of "climate experts".
I have been in operational meteorology since 1978, and I know dozens and dozens of broadcast meteorologists all over the country. Our big job: look at a large volume of raw data and come up with a public weather forecast for the next seven days. I do not know of a single TV meteorologist who buys into the man-made global warming hype. I know there must be a few out there, but I can’t find them. Here are the basic facts you need to know:

*Billions of dollars of grant money is flowing into the pockets of those on the man-made global warming bandwagon. No man-made global warming, the money dries up. This is big money, make no mistake about it. Always follow the money trail and it tells a story. Even the lady at “The Weather Channel” probably gets paid good money for a prime time show on climate change. No man-made global warming, no show, and no salary. Nothing wrong with making money at all, but when money becomes the motivation for a scientific conclusion, then we have a problem. For many, global warming is a big cash grab.

*The climate of this planet has been changing since God put the planet here. It will always change, and the warming in the last 10 years is not much difference than the warming we saw in the 1930s and other decades. And, lets not forget we are at the end of the ice age in which ice covered most of North America and Northern Europe.
It comes as no surprise to me that money is a motivating factor for global warming. The government is infamous for handing out lots of money for scientific research, but what sense would it make to give money for research to suggest there is no global warming? If there is no global warming, it would make no sense to waste money on it, right? Yeah, if you have some common sense apparently.

And natural changes in the weather patterns are almost always ignored, because again it is hard to hype up something that we do not have any impact on. Where would the money go if we did?

It is clear why those like Mr. Spann have remained quiet. They see nothing to get worked up about. Now, though, their credibility may be called into question when they all appear to hold the same view on a widely disputed (no, there is not a consensus) "theory", and their very jobs may be at stake if they do nothing. It is time for more of them to speak up and question Heidi Cullen; maybe it might make Al Gore shut up when he has so many qualified experts speaking against global warming.