Scientists, TV weather reporters at odds over warming

Return To Article

Commenting has temporarily been suspended in preparation for our new website launch, which is planned for the week of August 12th. When the new site goes live, we will also launch our new commenting platform. Thank you for your patience while we make these changes.

  • Meteorologists may change
    March 30, 2010 10:40 a.m.

    ScienceDaily for March 29th reported that quite a few meteorologists are interested in reporting on climate change. Meteorologists seem to have an acceptance by the public that scientists don't have. In order to make this change, meteorologists will have to change their perspective, as Look at the long term brought out.

  • Look at the long term
    March 30, 2010 9:30 a.m.

    Climate change is a long-term effect (not just in years but in decades, centuries, and longer), and meteorologists don't see the long-term because they are absorbed in the ups and downs of daily changes. Meteorologists should be ashamed of themselves for speaking out on this topic, because they have the wrong viewpoint for recognizing climate change. It's like looking at the ups and downs of real data or the trends as shown by running averages of the data.

  • Steve, that's why
    March 30, 2010 9:16 a.m.

    It sometimes takes a degree to decipher data in "such complex systems." Believe tv weather forecasters at your own risk...liking planning for that back yard barbeque based on a 7 day forecast. It's entertainment...all the death and destruction in the first 12 minutes of the newscast is nothing but a life support system to get the viewer through commercials before the highly rated weather forecast which is, indeed, highly rated, but often wrong.

  • No, nope, it's easy
    March 30, 2010 7:57 a.m.

    Temperature measurment is pretty easy. We have millions of data points around the entire globe and the average global temperature is rising in perfect synch with CO2 levels.

    A 5 year old could figure that out. You just don't want to believe it. You continue to fabricate a scientific controvercy where there is none. Stop being tools.

  • Glossed over was
    March 30, 2010 7:32 a.m.

    Heidi Cullen's attempt to silence global warming critics. Like so many involved in global warming her response was "toe the party line or we'll get rid of you". Meteorologists have a better understanding of what is involved in predicting the weather than the average person, and no financial interest in getting research money to continue studying global warming.

  • Steve in Ohio
    March 30, 2010 5:50 a.m.

    It is foolish to trust someone just because they have a degree. I trust good data, (which is not as simple to come by as most people often think), but even then finding the proper interpretation of the data can be extremely difficult in such complex systems.

  • Tab L. Uno
    March 30, 2010 5:40 a.m.

    Isaac Asimov wrote one of the best science fiction trilogies of all time back in the 80s, THE FOUNDATION SERIES. The basic premise was the use of psychohistorians who could predict the broad swathes of the universal path of the human history. Like today's controversy over weather patterns, Asimov supposed that while it was impossible to predict individual weather patterns (such as with meteorologists), he believe that when the human population taken together, it would be possible to predict the general, overall trend of human history just as what climatologist are predicting in the general level of the world's temperature. While it may be impossible to predict an individual meteorological event at a specific time and place, it might very well be possible to posit a specific worldworld average temperature in a decade or two.

  • Anonymous
    March 29, 2010 11:51 p.m.

    Did you not catch the paragraph that states that half of all TV weather forecasters do not have degrees in meteorology, hence they are not meteorologists.

    I'll trust a climatologist over a TV weather forecaster with no training beyond broadcast school.

  • John Pack Lambert
    March 29, 2010 10:42 p.m.

    The title of this article creates a false diachotomy, engaging in an attempt to malign to qualifications of meteorologists.

    The fact that climatologist accept the notion of man-made global warming tells us nothing of its validity. This is no more surprising than that physical anthropologists accept biological evolution. In both disciplines the entire discipline is built around the notions embodied in the world-view mentioned. Modern climatology is built around the basic assumption that human's can and do control the climate.