Global Warmers call for sceptical meteorologists to be “Decertified”

The Weather Channel’s Heidi Cullen has called for decertifying AMS broadcasters who denied global warming was real. There have been over a thousand comments to The Weather Channel (TWC) about this.

I would say this is just a rare misjudged public comment and that discrimination against sceptics has been going on quietly, behind the scenes, for decades and I am not talking about TWC here. It might take the form of threats to tenured positions, difficulty publishing worthy papers critical of IPCC science, difficulties attracting funding that is not for pro-IPCC science, just general quiet slander.

In response to the many critical comments to TWC, Heidi Cullen, host of the weekly global warming show The Climate Code, tried to redirect the conversation in her blog post late Thursday afternoon: She says, “I wrote a post recently that has generated some pretty strong reaction and I wanted to take a moment to stop the spin.”

Good try Heidi.

AMS certified ABC-TV weatherman James Spann’s has written a devastating critique of Cullen. Spann, who has been in the weather business since 1978 noted “I do not know of a single TV meteorologist who buys into the man-made global warming hype” and he says that climate alarmism is driven by huge research grants that become “the motivation for a scientific conclusion” Read Spann’s comments here:

4 thoughts on “Global Warmers call for sceptical meteorologists to be “Decertified””

  1. Heidi Cullen has fallen into the trap of thiniking that her cause is noble and any who disagree with her are not. Her thinking takes the leap that opponents should be punished if they do not support her “noble” cause. Although Ms Cullen may not like the comparison, her thinking falls right in line with such people as Hugo Chavez and Kim Jeong Il.

    We have had this sort of thought pattern in science before. Da Vinci and Copernicus were victims of similar thinking about science. Steve Bloom will want to point out that it was religious ideology which viciimized Da Vinici and Copernicus. This is true, but would you not characterize Cullen’s call for punishment of those who do not share her beliefs as akin to religious zeal?

  2. What is the proposed operational definition of “to deny global warming is real?”

    For example, if I believe that there is an AGW term, but it is not the only term in the equation, and that there is significant negative feedback mechanisms, does that make me a “denier?”

    Just askin’ …… 🙂

  3. Steve asks, What is the proposed operational definition of “to deny global warming is real?”

    The definition is that you are a “heretic” and your beliefs are “heresy”! This puts you in exactly the same boat as da Vinci and Copernicus. Nice company to be in!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *