Climate change PROVED to be nothing but a lie, claims top meteorologist

[claig]

"THE debate about climate change is finished - because it has been categorically proved NOT to exist, one of the world's leading meteorologists has claimed."

And the distinguished meteorologist goes on to say what many wise heads have long been saying:

"Polar Bears are increasing in number."

www.express.co.uk/news/nature/526191/Climate-change-is-a-lie-global-warming-not-real-claims-weather-channel-founder

[divingoffthebalcony]

I'll reserve judgement until a paper other than the Express report it

[claig]

I have a link to the Daily Mail, if the Express is not to your liking.

[claig]

"Weather Channel boss calls global warming 'the greatest scam in history'"

www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/earthnews/3313785/Weather-Channel-boss-calls-global-warming-the-greatest-scam-in-history.html

It's all collapsing, all coming to an end. The spinners couldn't weave enough webs to maintain it forever.

[Iggly]

That's not really how science works.

I'm sure newton thought he'd cracked it then along came Einstein...

[WhereYouLeftIt]

He is NOT a "distinguised meteorologist". He was a TV weather presenter, just like Ulrika Johnson.

Also, why is this now news? He's been spouting this for years. Even your Telegraph link dates from 2007 .

[msrisotto]

Aaahahahahahahahaha

[msrisotto]

Well never mind the overwhelming consensus of actual scientists then, this one crack pot says it's all a lie! Sorted!

Thanks for the laugh op. I needed that.

[OhYouBadBadKitten]

whereyouleftit beat me to it. He's a weatherman, not a meteorologist never mind a climatologist and its not exactly news, he's been saying this since 2007.

[claig]

Apologies, I didn't realise he was not a meteorologist because the Express article calls him "one of the world's leading meteorologists" and he says

"I have studied climate change seriously for years. It has become a political and environment agenda item, but the science is not valid"

But wikipedia says

"Critics of Coleman’s have questioned his lack of academic credentials, journalism degree, and charge that he has not conducted actual research in the area of climate change."

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Coleman_(news_weathercaster)

So I am not sure what is going on here. He sounds like he is talking sense, but it appears he is not in the top ranks of the world's meteorologists.

[ThisFenceIsComfy]

Climate change research has been peer reviewed and is the commonly held stance. This is one nutter man.

Of course it may all turn out to be crap but it's doubtful, isn't it. Climate change is not theoretical. It's backed up by observation.

Still the beauty of science is that everything can be questioned and challenged in the name of progress and understanding. However this man is nowhere near enough for me.

[RightyTightyLeftyLoosey]

this is hilarious!
Even for a (sort of) conspiracy theorist I have to say climate change is real.
If it really was all a big scam the Government would have been using it years ago, but in reality it has taken decades of campaigning and shouting to get the powers that be to listen to us on this subject, so I just don't buy this!

Plus as pp have said he is a weather man with the qualifications of Ulrika Johnson - would anyone take her views on climate change seriously??
Plus the Express is not exactly noted for its balanced/ well researched reporting now is it?

[JabberJabberJay]

Top meteorologist? Where did he go to university? Which institution did he get his PhD from? What area is he currently researching? In which peer-reviewed journal has he published his findings?

Oh. Wait.

[PuffinsAreFicticious]

Yup, climate change is real. No ifs, no buts, no maybes. And one loon who's been banging on with the same useless data for years isn't going to make it go away.

We can slow down the effects. But only if people stop believing idiots.

[claig]

'Even for a (sort of) conspiracy theorist I have to say climate change is real.'

RightyTightyLeftyLoosey, what kind of a self-respecting conspiracy theorist are you? Please do the research and then you will understand why what the distinguished weathercaster was saying makes a lot of sense.

'If it really was all a big scam the Government would have been using it years ago, but in reality it has taken decades of campaigning and shouting to get the powers that be to listen to us on this subject, so I just don't buy this!'

But the decades of shouting and campaigning is often funded by the EU and governments. They often give money to these advocacy groups to preach to the public who are sceptical. That is how the game works. They know that if Gordon Brown stands up and says "we have only 5 years left to save the planet", that some of the awkward squad in the public will say "aye, aye, what's going on 'ere?"

You are falling in to the Russell Brand trap. If yoiu watch the Trews, you will hear him talking about conspiracies that he believes in, but when it comes to climate change, he is with the likes Gordon Brown and the EU etc in believing in it, because he asks the question "how can it be a conspiracy, what is in it for them?"

That just shows that he is on the lowest rung of the conspiracy ladder and that he still has a lot to learn and may need a complete rewrite of his book "Revolution" when he finally does start to get it. He doesn't get it, he doesn't know what is in it for them.

[caroldecker]

He is a spokesperson for the NIPPC which does have many scientists attached. Not sure who funds it though

[claig]

Here is Russell Brand showing that he doesn't get it when he asks

"Who Profits From Denying Climate Change? Russell Brand The Trews (E149)"

Now if he had the distinguished weathercaster on the Trews, he would find out what it is all about.

[claig]

Sorry this is the better Russell Brand Trews video where he asks what is behind it but doesn't understand it. He asks "what would they gain?" but he doesn't know the answer.

"Climate Change Debate: Which Is The Hoax? Russell Brand The Trews (E95)"

[RightyTightyLeftyLoosey]

Claig

1. I am my own type of conspiracy theorist, in that I don't need others telling me what is or isn't right, I look at things with my own eyes and brain. I draw my own conculsions, and while I may think that many things Governments tell us are at best twisted, and at worst outright lies, I believe that we as a species are fucking up our planet big time. Not just clmate change but the whole issue of pollution by plastics etc. The evidence is all around us. And for the record I couldn't give a hoot what Russell Brand says.
   
   
2. I am actually starting to believe that people like the idiot "meteorologist" are doing the Government's handywork. Our whole system of consumerism is based on the need to pollute, and dealing with it properly will be lifestyle changing, and very detrimental to the economic system as it stands. The Governemnt merely tries to position itself in such a way that it can say "Look, we are doing something", there really is nothing in real change for them.
   So I ask you, how do you know that the anti-climate change lobby are not the real Government plants?

[claig]

'I am my own type of conspiracy theorist, in that I don't need others telling me what is or isn't right'

Everybody needs information from other people. None of us knows it all, especially Gordon Brown. That is why you have to do the research and read what distinguished weathercasters have to say.

'So I ask you, how do you know that the anti-climate change lobby are not the real Government plants?'

Because you have to understand the agenda - Agenda 21 - and yes there are always plants, but the system pursues Agenda 21, it does not want to stop it.

[CogitoErgoSometimes]

Ask any gardener or farmer.... The climate is changing whether anyone wants to believe it or not. Triumphantly pointing to solitary studies seems a silly example of futile point scoring in the circumstances. Preparation for different weather patterns is just commonsense.

[CrotchMaven]

Fuck, I hope not. I'd be out of a job if it is.

Actually, though, whilst my job is founded in legislation to minimise the amount of carbon emitted, the result is that buildings are less energy demanding, which is good for the inhabitants and their monthly bills. And that's independent of the effect on climate change. The technological improvements that have come about because of legislation is quite amazing. The market wouldn't have made such progress alone since 2008 if it hadn't have been for planning conditions and building regs progression.

Meteorologists are not climatologists, btw. Especially not those with a website to promote.

For a cynic, claig, you are often quite naive. 2016 is going to be very interesting. Zero carbon new homes, anyone?

[echt]

www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/oct/13/pentagon-global-warming-will-change-how-us-military-trains-and-goes-to-war

This

[claig]

"The Pentagon was first instructed by Congress in 2007 to incorporate climate change into its long-term security planning.

But Republicans in Congress have gone on to block the military from preparing for a warmer future, cutting funds for intelligence gathering or testing low-carbon jet fuels."

www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/oct/13/pentagon-global-warming-will-change-how-us-military-trains-and-goes-to-war

It was the politicians who told the military to do it. It is politically driven.

[Puzzledandpissedoff]

The spinners couldn't weave enough webs to maintain it forever

Personally I agree, but even if someone proved absolutely beyond doubt that it's nonsense, the climate change fanatics wouldn't give up easily - they're making too much money out of it for that

[ravenAK]

The Express? On climate change?

They've run the same hysterical 'Winter Is Coming!' front page splash since Noah was worrying about if he had enough antifreeze on the Ark, ffs.

The only way you could tell anything about the weather from the Express would be by leaving a copy outside & seeing if it gets wet.