Daily Blog, 10/16/09: Coleman's Comments
NOAA, The National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration, is our Federal agency that deals with climate and weather, among many other things. It is the parent agency of the National Weather Service, the successor agency to the Weather Bureau, which puts out the daily weather forecasts. It is the parent to the Climate Prediction Center which puts out the seasonal outlooks. Within these agencies reside most of the Meteorologists, Climatologists, Physicists and Computer modelers who deal in climate. There is a a pressure from the politicians and the professional organizations, such as the American Meteorological Society, and the government and non-government agencies that do climate research for them to keep with the "accepted consensus" about global warming, or as it is now politically correct to term it, climate change. We, the climate realists, i.e. skeptics of global warming, are shunned by these professionals whose positions and careers depend on "toeing the line." When various scientists retire or move out of the establishment, they frequently join our ranks, but those on the job simply can not become rebels.
There is pressure on the Climate Prediction Center, the Hurricane Center and the Severe Weather Center to predict rising temperatures and increased storm activities and other weather extremes to support Al Gore, the UN IPPC and their friends. So its gratifying to me to see the winter outlook (December-January-February) fall into the general climate middle ground and not reach for some big departure from normal. It is too bad, the tropical forecasters didn't follow the El Nino evidence in the Spring and hold back on their tropical forecast which proved to be far too aggressive.
It is a gradual thing, but I sense some progress with better balance in the media on the issue. The opinion piece in the San Francisco Chronicle, reprinted in the North County times is a case in point. Here are some experts:
"What happened to global warming?" read the headline ---- on BBC News on Oct. 9, no less. Consider it a cataclysmic event: Mainstream news organizations have begun reporting on scientific research that suggests that global warming may not be caused by man and may not be as dire and eminent as alarmists suggest....
Over the years, global warming alarmists have sought to stifle debate by arguing that there was no debate. They bullied dissenters and excommunicated nonbelievers from their panels. In the name of science, disciples made it a virtue to not recognize the existence of scientists such as MIT's Richard Lindzen and Colorado State University's William Gray.
For a long time, that approach worked. But after 11 years without record temperatures that had the seas spilling over the Statue of Liberty's toes, they are going to have to change tactics....
The full article by Debra Saunders can be read at this URL: If she were near, I would give here a grandfatherly hug and an "atta boy". Monday I am to be interviewed for a journal article by a writer who is making a trip from Washington to San Diego just to talk to me. Wow, that makes me feel important and also makes me nervous. Is he working for Al and the boys? You never know. John Coleman To send me an email, click here
|
