Weather Channel Founder to Sue Al Gore for Global Warming Fraud

Climate change denier John Coleman has come up with his best publicity stunt so far, aided and abetted by, who else, Fox News Channel:

, ,

  • Joey

    The fonts they use on that show are the most annoying ever.

  • http://www.toddalbert.com Todd Albert

    Of the 30,000, 9,000 have PhDs. ZERO of those PhDs are in atmospheric sciences. Oops. I have a PhD in atmospheric sciences and will debate ANY ONE OF THEM. Bring it on.

  • http://www.toddalbert.com Todd Albert

    The claim that CO2 warms the Earth is undeniable science — you can show it in a lab or compare planets like Earth and Venus — Venus is HOTTER even though it is FURTHER from the Sun.

    But we're not saying that the Earth is going to bake. CO2 has risen and so have global temperatures. Why is this being denied? Ask Exxon.

    • emperorreagan

      Venus is closer to the Sun than Earth.

    • Sum Gai

      I hope you were talking about a planet other than Venus and just got the name wrong. Otherwise, I'd say you put your argument in jeopardy because we're talking grade school science here.

      Here's how it goes, http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c

    • Polymorpheous

      – Venus is HOTTER even though it is FURTHER from the Sun.

      so much for that PhD!

    • tonyviner

      Is there another Venus somewhere? What the hell, you're probably right.

    • m walder

      you might need to get an education, WTF are you going on about the Venus is further from the sun, even a 3rd grater knows venues is closer to the sun than the earth, oh, and i have read and understood the leaked emails, and the do make sense, So get an education before you shoot you twat mouth off, idiot. BTW, Global temperatures are falling Scientifically proven to.

      • http://www.toddalbert.com Todd Albert

        Oops. A quick mistake. Perhaps I shouldn't comment back to climate skeptics after I've had a few beers, but perhaps that's the only time that I have the patience.

        Either way, the climates of both Earth and Mars have fluctuated to much warmer and much colder temperatures due to concentrations of greenhouse gasses. The radiative transfer, energy balance, and physics, are all well understood.

        In the future, though, if you plan to insult someone for making a mistake, you might wish to check your spelling and grammar first (3rd GRATER? venues? earth? But you capitalize Scientifically? I'm glad to see how well our education system is working out.

        • FergalR

          Carbon dioxide is a greenhouse gas. It's anyone's guess whether greater concentrations of CO2 will increase the Earth's average temperature or not. We have barely any idea how this planet's climate works. If you think CO2 is the main driver of climate or that you understand global energy balance then I hope that you're only deluding yourself. Referencing Venus as if it is some sort of model for the Earth is so incredibly stupid that it's hard to know where to start.

          • http://www.toddalbert.com Todd Albert

            It's not anyones guess. We have (1) observations of Earth's past, (2) observations of other planets, (3) theoretical models, (4) laboratory testing!!, (5) radiative transfer models, (6) actual measurements, and more. We know how CO2 affects climate. We know how this effect diminishes with (much) higher concentrations of CO2. Why claim that we don't know these things? Are you a climatologists? Have you ever even studied climatology? Radiative transfer? Atmospheric physics?

          • http://coolshits.wordpress.com John Conner

            But we also know that CO2 doesn't affect our climate half as much as the sun does… and this controlled laboratory testing… would you explain that for our lovely viewers? Because I would like to point out all the different variables I'm sure were unaccounted for in these Peer-reviewed (i'm sure..) controlled laboratory testing.

            The emails don't disprove anything.. what it does say, is that most of the scientists that worked at East Anglia (pretty much the NASA of climate science, let's not be modest about how chummy these particular scientists were with political leaders) themselves were shocked to see that there was an apparent cooling trend. And “how were they going to explain” it? Things like that…

            Further, if you ACTUALLY go into reading the emails, you can see the ACTUAL SOURCE CODE for some of the models they used to promote their theory.. and WHAT does the source code say? It BLATANTLY shows the adding of whole degrees of temperature here and there to make the temperatures APPEAR warmer than they actually were.. THAT is a big no no… THAT is what the media chooses not to report to help the AGW theory save-face.

            Speaking of AGW, do you think it's fair to stick the average everyday people with a tax to “help neutralize their carbon footprint” when it is CLEAR that the average Joe doesn't contribute NEARLY as much as say “dirty” companies that use coal and fossil fuels? Or even the natural occurrences like volcanoes? Or bovines? Or pets? Or should we stop breathing? Stop exhaling ALL that CO2.

            THAT is our major gripe with this issue… the policy that keeps coming out is going to REALLY hurt the average taxpayer. The excess costs we will incur when we have to pay for ANYTHING energy related.. electricity? heat? gasoline?

        • Dan Mac

          Sorry. I hate to insult. But a few beers are no excuse–especially when waving your worthless PHD around. You clearly believed Venus was farther from the sun. Though you knew it was hotter–suggesting you also knew of some science that explained this. Admit it and laugh. That’s the best you can do now. You may have the credentials to teach at the university, but the global warming theory has lost some more of its credibility here and now.

          “Climate skeptics?” I don’t fully agree or disagree with the other skeptics here, but if you want to use name calling rather than debate try “Climate Deniers.” That has more oomph–sort of suggests they might be in alignment with Nazi Holocaust Deniers.

          As for “undeniable science,” aren’t we supposed to question what we think we know? As I understand it, if it’s “undeniable” it’s religion, not true science.

          There is evidence also, suggesting all the planets in our solar system are experiencing global warming at this time–due to solar activity.

    • alienevolved

      venus is definately closer to the sun last time i looked!
      http://www.nasa.gov/images/content/122597main_k
      i have an o level in biology!!!
      read about edward lorenzs problems with lab weather
      good luck with that one!

    • Dan Mac

      You have a PHD–and you actually don’t know where Venus is! What did you learn at the institution? How to repeat false facts?

      I’m not saying that CO2 has nothing to do with temperature rising. I’m an open minded skeptic. But this phd is the perfect example of what true education isn’t–institutionally trained!

  • http://www.toddalbert.com Todd Albert

    No Joey, the people talking are the most annoying ever. Much worse than the fonts.

    By the way, the IPCC is an extremely conservative organization.

  • Word Eater

    I'm as much of a skeptic as anybody, but I doubt suing Al Gore will accomplish anything.

    If his goal is to simply get the science discussed in court as a matter of public record, well, that's cool, I guess. I imagine there might have been a better way to do it.

    I've read enough scientifically sound anti-anthro global warming to have my doubts as to the severity of man's impact on the Earth. But I do not doubt that we do, in fact, have an impact and a significant one.

    The common sense view is that we are helping to accelerate an overall global climate change that was already taking place. I can get behind this.

    I'm also behind analysis that says man kind cannot do anything to halt the climate change or really even slow it down. It's too late.

    Things are going to suck sooner than they should have. Many species will not have time to react and will die off.

    This is the nature of.. well, nature. There are these big cycles that we cannot help but be a part of.

    Biodiversity is great but it is not something that can be maintained artificially.

    If man stopped cutting down rain forests for cow pastures or crops, stopped dumping trash into the ocean, and made intelligent long term decisions, we could do a lot to help minimize the pain of climate change.

    Some people criticize Al Gore for being set to make billions off of the tech he's pushing to help the Earth. So. That's capitalism.

    Wind power, solar power, and geothermal power are effectively limitless. Nuclear power has a ridiculously high return on investment.

    Clean coal, isn't. Oil reserves are dwindling. It may be 125 years before they run out, but it will be a few billion years before solar runs out.

    I could care less about foreign vs. American oil. We shouldn't be focusing on oil, regardless.

    On the other hand, if the Yellowstone super volcano were to explode, all of our tiny conservation efforts would mean exactly nothing.

  • Dan

    Did the submitter write the editorialized statement to introduce the video? I think of folks mocking the Fox “We report, you decide.” motto, and um… what's the difference here?

  • Nick

    Sets a precedent, now Evolutionists will be able to SUE Intelligent Design “theorists” yay hoorayyy!!!

  • Azra31

    Jesus, they both sound like absolute idiots.
    Yeah CO2 isnt a pollutant, but it's a greenhouse gas.
    Yes you can't say anything without people thinking you're stupid or crazy, because you are stupid or crazy.

  • wfzlsster

    I'm going with the weatherman. The Sun is by far the leading heat source for this planet and past weather patterns closely match solar activity. 350 part per million of CO2 makes it a minor player.

  • Ascendaeus

    dude i wonder if there was people in germeny in the 1930's arguing back and forth about whether or not )THEY( Thought that arian blood is in every way superior to the blood of the jews the gypseys the poles the slavs but you know,…. it looks like it didn't matter what they thought, 20 million were exterminated like cocroaches whether or not they're blood was inferior to that of they're blonde haired blue eyed counterparts. it's Pseudo-Science. Sun Spot Activity is responsible for ice melting on mars and earth. Venus is the 2nd Planet,… homie

  • traveller55

    CLIMATEGATE!

    THE TRUTH OUT – THE 'SCIENTISTS' LIED TO PUSH THEIR GLOBAL WARMING AGENDA.

    • http://www.toddalbert.com Todd Albert

      Uh, yeah, we have an agenda. Truth be told, most of us, through our university-sponsored retirement accounts, are more investing in oil and gas than in green energy. Sorry, but I make no profit from an agenda as you say. It is QUITE the OPPOSITE. The disinformation campaign that you are so clearly buying into is funded by big oil.

      Frustrated climate scientist,
      Todd

      • Dan Mac

        You are of course correct about Big Oil. But please, be aware of Big Nukes.

        I don’t think you have an agenda, Todd, other than what you believe is right and good. I was certainly a jerk to throw Venus in your face. But in the spirit of this type of forum–and because of the phd waving–I couldn’t resist….

        To be clear, I am an open minded skeptic. I do not trust everything written in the books you’ve studied–nor the agenda of those who push biased knowledge into universities. As was said by the bards of the ancient universities, “the beginning of knowledge is doubt.”

  • GoodDoktorBad

    While everybody sits around arguing about “global warming”, the millions of other abuses to the planet go undiscussed and unaddressed. Global warming is a term for ONE effect that our stupidity may be causing.
    The burning of fossil fuels has a much larger and profound effect on our planet then simply “global warming”.
    People just don't want to see it. Frankly, its scary for people, so some find comfort in denial or distraction.
    The global warming arguement is a distraction from much larger looming problems with our environment.

    Sue Al Gore, then go shopping in your Hummer, everything is OK. Enjoy the fantasy while you can……eh?

    • Dan Mac

      I concur, wholly. Global climate change is no doubt real. But it is not only dwarfed by other atrocities to our environment, it is a diversion from them–and an excuse to empower giant corporations, crush smaller businesses, take away more freedom from common folk, produce more nuclear power, and carry out horrific polluting in the form of Stratospheric Aerosol Geo-engineering. That is the real reason politicians who couldn’t care less about the natural environment have become “environmentalists.”

  • http://coolshits.wordpress.com John Conner

    But we also know that CO2 doesn’t affect our climate half as much as the sun does… and this controlled laboratory testing… would you explain that for our lovely viewers? Because I would like to point out all the different variables I’m sure were unaccounted for in these Peer-reviewed (i’m sure..) controlled laboratory testing.

    The emails don’t disprove anything.. what it does say, is that most of the scientists that worked at East Anglia (pretty much the NASA of climate science, let’s not be modest about how chummy these particular scientists were with political leaders) themselves were shocked to see that there was an apparent cooling trend. And “how were they going to explain” it? Things like that…

    Further, if you ACTUALLY go into reading the emails, you can see the ACTUAL SOURCE CODE for some of the models they used to promote their theory.. and WHAT does the source code say? It BLATANTLY shows the adding of whole degrees of temperature here and there to make the temperatures APPEAR warmer than they actually were.. THAT is a big no no… THAT is what the media chooses not to report to help the AGW theory save-face.

    Speaking of AGW, do you think it’s fair to stick the average everyday people with a tax to “help neutralize their carbon footprint” when it is CLEAR that the average Joe doesn’t contribute NEARLY as much as say “dirty” companies that use coal and fossil fuels? Or even the natural occurrences like volcanoes? Or bovines? Or pets? Or should we stop breathing? Stop exhaling ALL that CO2.

    THAT is our major gripe with this issue… the policy that keeps coming out is going to REALLY hurt the average taxpayer. The excess costs we will incur when we have to pay for ANYTHING energy related.. electricity? heat? gasoline?

  • Dan Mac

    You have a PHD–and you actually don’t know where Venus is! What did you learn at the institution? How to repeat false facts?

    I’m not saying that CO2 has nothing to do with temperature rising. I’m an open minded skeptic. But this phd is the perfect example of what true education isn’t–institutionally trained!

  • Dan Mac

    Sorry. I hate to insult. But a few beers are no excuse–especially when waving your worthless PHD around. You clearly believed Venus was farther from the sun. Though you knew it was hotter–suggesting you also knew of some science that explained this. Admit it and laugh. That’s the best you can do now. You may have the credentials to teach at the university, but the global warming theory has lost some more of its credibility here and now.

    “Climate skeptics?” I don’t fully agree or disagree with the other skeptics here, but if you want to use name calling rather than debate try “Climate Deniers.” That has more oomph–sort of suggests they might be in alignment with Nazi Holocaust Deniers.

    As for “undeniable science,” aren’t we supposed to question what we think we know? As I understand it, if it’s “undeniable” it’s religion, not true science.

    There is evidence also, suggesting all the planets in our solar system are experiencing global warming at this time–due to solar activity.

  • Dan Mac

    I concur, wholly. Global climate change is no doubt real. But it is not only dwarfed by other atrocities to our environment, it is a diversion from them–and an excuse to empower giant corporations, crush smaller businesses, take away more freedom from common folk, produce more nuclear power, and carry out horrific polluting in the form of Stratospheric Aerosol Geo-engineering. That is the real reason politicians who couldn’t care less about the natural environment have become “environmentalists.”

  • Dan Mac

    You are of course correct about Big Oil. But please, be aware of Big Nukes.

    I don’t think you have an agenda, Todd, other than what you believe is right and good. I was certainly a jerk to throw Venus in your face. But in the spirit of this type of forum–and because of the phd waving–I couldn’t resist….

    To be clear, I am an open minded skeptic. I do not trust everything written in the books you’ve studied–nor the agenda of those who push biased knowledge into universities. As was said by the bards of the ancient universities, “the beginning of knowledge is doubt.”