Is Global Warming a Scam? John Coleman, Founder of the Weather Channel, Says Yes
Coleman argues that the high caliber constituents supporting climate changes have monetary motives. At the same time, democrats argue the same about the republican agenda that aims to preserve oil profits. Although Coleman offers an interesting point of view on the subject, it still does not explain the drastic changes in weather patterns and melting glaciers.
Some scientists do back Coleman's assertion, but valid evidence to support his theory is far and in between. Most professionals agree there is a strong connection between man's industrial progression and the changes in temperatures or weather around the world. Coleman denies this connection out right and gave a good example of his typical argument in an article prepared for the International Climate and Environmental Change Assessment Project:
"I say this knowing you probably won't believe a me, a mere TV weatherman, challenging a Nobel Prize, Academy Award and Emmy Award winning former Vice President of United States. ... I have read dozens of scientific papers. I have talked with numerous scientists. I have studied. I have thought about it. I know I am correct."
The problem with John Coleman's arguments is the lack of empirical truth. His ideas are not typically backed by anything other than emotional appeal and because of strong conservative tethers wrapped up in Coleman, many believe he could be the one protecting a political special interest. It's very difficult to find a single supporting fact for Coleman's argument that contains a statistical trend or reliable source, and actually, he denounces scientific methods for gaining evidence as a propagandist tool used to propagate lies.
After weighing the evidence mounted from both sides of the political spectrum, global warming appears to be a very real problem. Too much evidence exists that points to human industry and carbon emissions as the primary catalyst for global warming. Unfortunately, John Coleman's arguments do not hold solid ground in a scientific debate. Slowing down oil consumption is not a political maneuver and slowing oil profit growth isn't profitable for anyone. It's very possible democrats really do want to clean up the environment and global warming may very well be the answer.
Published by Robert Cole
I work, write and live in Oklahoma. I read and write poetry along with short fiction, essays, general interest and literary reviews. View profile
- Biologist: Global Warming Puts Water Supplies in Trouble Sarah Afshar interviews a biologist and chemist about one of the most current, yet controversial issues in the world, global warming.
- Global Warming: The DebateAmericans are being scared by those in power by being told that the Earth is going to end as a huge oven if we don't do something about the cars we drive, the energy we consume, etc. But just how real is this threat o...
IPCC Global Warming Report Draws CriticismA Candaian group has published an "independent summary for policymakers" to deny that global warming is mostly caused by human activity, namely the burning of fossil fuels. The...
How World Citizens Can Fight Global WarmingWhen faced with the decision to shut down polluting plants or curtail recreational activities that increase global warming, the government as well as world citizens choose to ig...- Global Warming Global Warming is something that scares many people. Why? It doesn't make sense to me. Honestly if you look at the whole thing from a common sense point of view, I think anyone would agree with me.
- Global Warming and the Weather Channel
- The Problem of Global Warming:The Extinction of Earth's Animals
- That was Some Month We Just Had: Part 3
- Global Warming: My Address to America and the Entire World
- Infomercials and Global Warming (Sex, Lies and Late Night Video Tape)
- Up with Global Warming
- Al Gore's Global Warming Campaign Gains Another Detractor
24 Comments
Post a Commentit's just an article yo.
Everything is black and white,there are no grey areas.Is porn wrong?..Yes.Is mcdonalds slowly killings us?..Yes.Should there be sugar in milk?..No.Do you NEED that new car or over priced house?..No.Is a baby,a "Baby" in the womb?..Yes.Are our childrens emotional problems and lack of direction directly linked to the removal of God from public schools?..Yes.Do our children have a lack of hope and purpose in this life because of the denouncing of God as a major factor in the success of human beings on this planet?..Yes.
who knows what's true
I'm neither an atmospheric scientist, nor am I an emotionally juvenile career politician (Gore) loser. I am, however, an intelligent U.S. Navy veteran journalist, senior citizen, and Christian. Knowledge of the Creation of all things is all I need to believe that what God created, man cannot screw up, no matter how smart he thinks he is. It is an excessively arrogant idiot who believes that mankind can cause such damage to what God created. What man has done is obvious to any thinking person: eliminated thought, not educated the young ones, created a "gimme" mindset in people, lost all morality and patriotism for his homeland and tried to take God out of our lives. Man is supposed to be a servant of this earth, but that does not mean eliminating resources man has found to make life better. Anyone who has accessed this website knows what I'm talking about. This whole global warming thing is nothing but a scam created by a snake oil salesman who imagines that he has credibility, and who
While it is rational to believe that adding anything to the atmosphere can be destructive I would like to know the following. We have been putting out forrest fires while in the past this was not an option. Has anyone calculated the amounts of particles that we have prevented from going into the atmosphere? Also, in New Mexico, we have one of the few "super volcanoes" in the world. When it errupted it was 600 times that of Mt. St. Helens. I would assume that this would have lead to global warming. What percentage as natured added v. man? I wonder about off sets by fire preventions etc...
Until I see some data concerning these other atmospheric additions, I can not make a judgement.
web browser, and do a little research.
This article is ridiculous. In order to see just a small portion of the empirical evidence John Coleman uses to draw his conclusion, you need only have 5 minutes and google. Perhaps the author had neither available. www.icecap.us is the site
Coleman is a member of, and MOUNTAINS of empirical evidence are available here debunking anthropogenic global warming. Example? Between 800 and 1300 AD, much of the world was several degrees warmer than today. People grew wine grapes in England, figs in Germany, assorted crops in Greenland. Then came the Little Ice Age, and temperatures considerably colder than today persisted until the climate warmed again around 1900. The likely cause? Changes in the sun's energy output, or perhaps the Earth's orbit, say Harvard-Smithsonian scientists Sallie Baliunas and Willie Soon.
Before you deride John Coleman's opinions as "lacking empirical evidence" and "not typically backed by anything other than emotional appeal" you should fire up your inconvenient
global warming ! by man ! then how did Greenland get its name, well before their was an industrial revolution,and combustioned powered vehichles
Yeah, finally a place to read the truth. Thank God for the internet....God, Not Gore.
John Coleman also said if you want to know the truth follow the money. Like Al Gores carbon credits are bought from a company that who owns? Oh yes, Al Gore owns the company. And where do the carbon credits go to? To a paper company to plant trees, though that same paper company is already under federal obligation (not to mention their own financial obligation if they want to have a future harvest) to reforest, so they are planting the trees anyway.
If you read further on the net, you can find story after story after story (and some from NASA) about the measurable temperature increase on just about every planet in our solar system.
The point is nobody knows anything at this point. Not that we shouldnt be good stewards, but its all just hype...much like McCarthyism and whos a communist.