There has been a recent bruhaha over “Dr.” Heidi Cullen of the Weather Channel who stated that any meteorologist who disagrees with global warming being mad made should be stripped of their certification by the American Meteorological Society.
From “Dr.” Heidi Cullen’s blog:
Meteorologists are among the few people trained in the sciences who are permitted regular access to our living rooms. And in that sense, they owe it to their audience to distinguish between solid, peer-reviewed science and junk political controversy. If a meteorologist can’t speak to the fundamental science of climate change, then maybe the AMS shouldn’t give them a Seal of Approval. Clearly, the AMS doesn’t agree that global warming can be blamed on cyclical weather patterns.
In response, a weatherman from Alabama who has also been studying the climate for almost 30 years blasted Dr. Cullen.
From James Spann:
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 canâ€™t find them.
Melanie Morgan has an excellent column on this particular subject and controversy.
The question then you may be asking is what does this have to do with 2008 and the presidential election? I’d say plenty.
There is disagreement on Global Warming and it’s causes. Politicians of every persuasion are taking sides and trying to change law and policy regarding the junk science of global warming. Barack Obama, for example, supports Nancy Pelosi creating a “Global Warming Panel” as does I’m sure every other Democratic candidate. I believe that with the debates there will be some discussion of Global Warming between candidates.