Decertification for Meterologists Who Deny the Science of Global Warming?
Globalwarming expert Heidi Cullen went public last month, calling for the American Meteorological Society (AMS) to withhold Seals of Approval for Meterologists who refute the scientific evidence of global warming. As host of The Weather Channel’s ”The Climate Code,” Cullen has been a staunch advocate for globalwarming awareness throughout 2006, and looks to continue that trend into 2007.
In an interesting post released by the U.S. Senate Committee on Environment & Public Works, Marc Morano further explores Cullen’s position, and discusses the ongoing and contentious feud between globalwarming skeptics and those who remain vocal about climate change, despite the stigma of being labled ‘climate alarmists’ by politicos such as himself.
Feed
jason Said:
on January 20, 2007 at 6:25 pm
This is perposterous! Heidi Cullen should be decertified for even suggesting such a thing
-The earth’s temperature is going to fluctuate, no matter what we do.
- Since 1750, the amount of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, mainly from burning fossil fuels, has risen to about 380 parts per million from 286 parts per million.
- How much is attributable to human activity? We don’t really know, and never really will know exactly.
- But some of it is, so maybe we should curtail those activities that perpetuate this condition. I don’t think we should make any sudden, drastic action!! A methodical shift toward cleaner, reusable sources of energy is the future and we need to continue to move in that direction.
In this internet/information age, trying to scare people into agreeing with your position will eventually make you look like a loon when the people discover that there are other sides to the story. Her credibility as a scientist is shot. She should be taken off the air.
Anyguy Usa Said:
on October 26, 2007 at 2:14 pm
What about H.A.A.R.P. ? Does anyone know the effects it has on anything?
It is funded through our tax dollars yet when people complain about global warming they want funding to stop it or for someone to commit to doing this or doing that? Do they know what effects H.A.A.R.P. produce on the environment before they start suggesting stopping this or doing that ? Just food for thought.