Who do you suppose said the following on his/her Internet blog:
“If a meteorologist has an AMS [American Meteorological Society] Seal of Approval which is used to confer legitimacy to TV meteorologists, then meteorologists have a responsibility to truly educate themselves on the science of global warming . . . . 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. It’s like allowing a meteorologist to go on-air and say that hurricanes rotate clockwise . . . It’s not a political statement . . . it’s just an incorrect statement.”
Okay, so that was too easy. It had to be Al Gore, everybody’s favorite fire-and-brimstone-breathing, global warming fundamentalist, right? Wrong! Al was the most logical guess, of course. But in actuality, it was — are you ready? — drum roll, please...here we go...the answer is...Heidi Cullen: The Weather Channel’s resident “climate expert.”
Heidi Cullen? Who the heck is that, you ask? Well, like I said, she’s The Weather Channel’s resident “climate expert.” (By the way, in case you’re wondering why “The” is capitalized in The Weather Channel, that’s just the way they do it. In fact, at one time, if you looked it up in the phone book, it was listed under “t” rather than “w,” which wasn’t exactly helpful in finding the listing.)
But wait a minute, back up for a second. Let’s examine part of Heidi’s blog: “Clearly, the AMS doesn’t agree that global warming can be blamed on cyclical weather patterns. It’s like allowing a meteorologist to go on-air and say that hurricanes rotate clockwise.”
Uh, no it’s not. That is an utterly illogical analogy. Determining which way a hurricane rotates requires no analysis, just simple observation, and for all of two seconds at that. Determining the cause of climate change, on the other hand — Well, does it really even have to be pointed out what a complex challenge that is?
But the main problem with Dr. Cullen’s blog entry was not the wildly illogical analogy, but rather the wildly inappropriate suggestion that the AMS withhold its Seal of Approval from meteorologists who don’t march lemming-like in lockstep with what has become apocalyptic, Al Gore-style, global warming orthodoxy. What the good doctor of climatology is basically recommending is a kind of blacklisting against television meteorologists who “can’t speak to the fundamental science of climate change,” or at least who won’t speak to it in the way in which the good doctor would prefer.
.jpg?t=20120527181101)





Article comments
1 - Martin Williams
"meteorologists have a responsibility to truly educate themselves on the science of global warming . . ."
- true.
Not sure why so much brouhaha over this; seems to be too much suppression of scientific discussion by politically misguided pundits.
2 - Dave Nalle
I was wondering how long it would be before someone on BC covered this. Glad to see the article.
And Martin, trying to keep meteorologists who question climate theory is ALSO suppression of scientific disucssion.
Dave
3 - Deano
Oh, please spare us the hyperbole. One person on The Weather Channel blogs about her opinion on the AMS and global warming and you claim a McCarthy-like atmosphere is crushing poor dissident meteorologists...
Give me a break. If I recall the Bush administration flunkies were acting far more McCarthist in discouraging government scientists from speaking out on subjects the Bushies did not agree with - global warming, the Big Bang etc.