TV weathercaster re-education proposed by NSF and GMU

This is really something. The job opening listed below advertises for an NSF funded  program at George Mason University for education of TV weathercasters on how “unusual weather events” are connected to “climate change”. Apparently the “weather is not climate” maxim has been thrown out the window in a desperate attempt to salvage sinking public opinion on the issue.

“This project will focus on establishing a national network of on-air broadcast meteorologists, climate scientists, university research programs, and key climate and weather science organizations, to engage, train, and empower local broadcast meteorologists to educate and inform the American public about climate.”

I suppose this relates to Dr. Kevin Trenberth’s statement about TV weathercasters in his recent speech preprint to be delivered at the upcoming AMS convention in Seattle.

Nevertheless, the natural variability provides valuable opportunities for ongoing “news” and education, as teachable moments, but many scientists have not been helpful, and many TV weathercasters are poorly informed and sometimes downright hostile (Wilson 2009).

From personal experience, I imagine they’ll be more even more hostile when their TV news director gets a call from the climate re-educators asking why they didn’t link the hailstorm yesterday to global warming.

Get a load of this statement:

It will also adapt and test conflict resolution theory and practice to engage meteorologists who reject the scientific consensus and climate scientists in constructive dialogue.

Here is the PDF hosted at NCAR/UCAR, and here is that PDF put to plain text below.

GMU logo

George Mason University Center for Climate Change Communication Postdoctoral Research Fellow

The George Mason University Center for Climate Change Communication invites applications for a full-time Postdoctoral Research Fellow to support an NSF-funded planning grant titled Making the Global Local: Unusual Weather Events as Climate Change Education Opportunities. The goal of this project is to establish a national network of climate and weather science organizations, and university research and teaching programs, to engage, train, and empower local broadcast meteorologists to educate and inform the American public about climate change. The project will integrate informal learning, mass communication, and experiential learning theories to develop and test new pedagogical approaches to informal science education through frequent mass media exposure, linked to realworld experience (i.e., the local weather). It will also adapt and test conflict resolution theory and practice to engage meteorologists who reject the scientific consensus and climate scientists in constructive dialogue. Collaborating institutions include National Oceanic & Atmospheric Administration, American Meteorological Society, National Weather Association, American Association of State Climatologists, American Geophysical Union, Climate Central, National Environmental Education Foundation, and Yale and Cornell universities.

Candidates must have a PhD in a relevant social or learning science discipline, and a track record of published journal articles and/or conference papers on relevant topics of inquiry including climate change communication, science communication and/or formal or informal science education. Experience in survey research, qualitative data collection, strategic (program) planning, professional development, and climate science is preferred. Additional skills required include competence in planning and multitasking, attention to detail, excellent organizational skills, ability to communicate verbally and in writing, and the ability to adapt to the changing demands of a dynamic research environment.

For full consideration, interested and qualified applicants must submit the online faculty application for position #F9401z. Applications should include (a) cover letter including a statement of research interests and career goals, and names and contact information of two professional references, and (b) a vita.


h/t to Samuel Patterson at www.climatequotes.com

About these ads

122 thoughts on “TV weathercaster re-education proposed by NSF and GMU

  1. Get your weather and propaganda at the one stop shop.

    I wonder, will the weather people go for it? Our local tv guy won’t touch the hoax with a 10 foot pole … he steers completely away.

  2. If you have a local skeptical TV weatherman or woman, please send this along to them. Remind them that “climate scientists” think of them as dimwitted talking heads who should not even be allowed to have opinions on “climate change.”

  3. This is disgusting and foolish. Disgusting because it is propaganda for AGW. Foolish because associating local weather events with global warming will only show that the theories held by the pro-AGW crowd are nonsense.

    I hope that meteorologists push back powerfully and thoroughly. I will be talking to Eric Cantor about Leftist propaganda and federal granting agencies.

  4. Don’t forget this part of the job posting:

    It will also adapt and test conflict resolution theory and practice to engage meteorologists who reject the scientific consensus and climate scientists in constructive dialogue.

    Teaching them how to attack meteorologists who don’t tow the line.

  5. How is it that any unusual weather event is automatically a result of climate “change”.

    It’s tantamount to the claim that there would be no unusual weather events if climate were not changing. There’s “unusual” weather events all the time, always have been, always will be.

  6. Anthony – I was pleased to see on CNN a few days ago, when the weather girl was asked by the anchor if the Aussie floods were caused by global warming, she explained that they were linked to La Nina, explained what that was, how it influenced weather, and did not mention global warming once.

    So once the newly brainwashed weather boys and girls are ready, the networks may have to do a lot of hiring and firing to put them in place.

    All the best.

  7. It might be worth noting that the AMS annual meeting is scheduled for January 23-27 in Seattle.

    The theme of the 2011 AMS Annual Meeting is “Communicating Weather and Climate.” http://www.ametsoc.org/meet/annual/index.html

    A tour of the Meeting’s web site suggests that the move to re-educate meteorologists is well under way. Trenberth, Somerville, Pope, Cicerone, Emanuael, Karoly…. they’ll all be presenting.

  8. “Apparently the “weather is not climate” maxim has been thrown out the window in a desperate attempt to salvage sinking public opinion on the issue.”

    The difference is that coming out of colleges and universities we now have a crop of meteorologists who have been indoctrinated in AGW since kindergarten so to them it is “fact”. They know nothing different and only “kooks” question it. It has been driven into them as “known fact” literally since nursery school. So “unusual weather events” are connected to “climate change” would seem quite natural to them.

  9. This is actually doubleplusgood! The developing analogy to the Dalton Minimum (~1790 to ~1830) might cause some difficulty in the doublethink department. Without adequate re-education, TV people might commit both thoughtcrime and facecrime!

  10. Sounds like recruiting new clergy for a church. Only those willing to follow established theology need apply.

    Ian

  11. I’m all for it….
    If anyone thinks climate scientists can screw up a forecast….
    …just wait until they have TV weathermen doing it

    By the end of the first month, there won’t be anyone that believes………

  12. Seems to be a theme of late. The more the data doesn’t co-operate, the more reliance on PR and blatant lies. As we have seen in Australia and even the freezing north this winter activists have been desperately throwing anything at the wall, in the hope that something will stick.

    Weather is not climate – except when we think it may promote the cause. I think the desperate act of breaking all their own rules for short term gain might well come back to bite them in the ass before very long.

  13. Here…I’ve reworded the posting for George Mason University to better reflect the intent…



    George Mason University Climate Club: Climate Change Communication Postdoctoral Research Fellow

    The George Mason University Climate Club invites applications for a full-time Postdoctoral Research Fellow to support an NSF-funded planning grant titled “Stoking the Global Warming Mania: Unusual Weather Events as Climate Change Hysteria Opportunities.” The goal of this project is to establish a national network of climate and weather group-think organizations, and university research and indoctrination programs, to “persuade” local broadcast meteorologists (if they know what’s good for them…) to fool and misdirect the American public about catastrophic climate change. The project will integrate informal learning (no tests!), mass hypnosis, and experiential learning theories (from ex-KGB officers) to develop and test new approaches to informal science education (no tests!) through frequent mass media propaganda, linked to realworld experience (e.g. protesting at coal-fired power plants during a blizzard). It will also adapt and test conflicting theory resolution (i.e. what to say when GCM predictions become epic failures) and practice to “engage” meteorologists who (unwisely) reject the scientific consensus and climate scientists in constructive dialogue in a dark back ally with several heavy-set climate “friends” (where persuasion becomes much easier). Collaborating groups and individuals include the American Meteorological Society, the American Geophysical Union, Climate Central, the Weather Channel, Greenpeace, Earth First, George Soros, Friends of Kevin Trenberth, and the Communist Party of America.

    Candidates must have a PhD in a relevant social or learning science discipline from one of those fancy, new online universities, and a track record of published articles in Mother Jones and Rolling Stone Magazines on relevant topics of inquiry including climate conference party planning (Bali! Cancun!), and science communication using puppets. Experience in social networking, money collection, and beer drinking is preferred. No experience in climate science is required (will train on the job). Additional skills required include…awww, don’t worry about that – just apply!!

  14. I got my degree in atmospheric physics from ITT Tech. I can’t tell you what a difference it has made in my life!

  15. sleeper says:
    January 15, 2011 at 11:51 am

    “Empower…” The word pegs my BS meter every time, without fail.

    Me too, just like “wellness” and “end times”.

  16. latitude says:
    January 15, 2011 at 12:31 pm

    I’m all for it….
    If anyone thinks climate scientists can screw up a forecast….
    …just wait until they have TV weathermen doing it

    By the end of the first month, there won’t be anyone that believes………

    Hate to break it to you, but TV weather folks are no better at predicting the weather 3 days out than climate scientists are at predicting 100 years out.

  17. It’s bad enough for the CAGW crowd when weathermen point out that rural temperatures are often lower than urban ones. Weather forecasters not blaming extreme weather on man made climate change must be doubly irritating.

  18. I think the people who think this might work need to go through some of the pop psychology fads of the last 30 years and see how they turned out. These fads even were embraced briefly by major corporations. My favorite was one where a long questionaire had to be filled out and everyone’s answers and scores were reviewed in front of their co-workers to see who was trying to achieve the best goals and were the best people. The conclusion we were lead to was that we all should want to be like the boss. It ended up angering the lowest level people and the mid-level folks simply refered to is as “suck-up psycology” and wondered aloud (to their bosses) how anyone could fall for this c__p. I suspect GMU will be equally as effective.

  19. Frank K. says:
    January 15, 2011 at 12:45 pm

    Here…I’ve reworded the posting for George Mason University to better reflect the intent…

    Now if only you could hack the GMU site and put your version up instead…!

  20. Moderator, Please check the filter for my previous post.
    Thanks.

    [You have made many posts. On what thread and for which specific post are you searching? Robt]

  21. They just keep on getting creepier and more desperate.

    Is it because they subconsciously sense the death of their religion or is some group like the Real Climate team pushing this crap behind the scenes?

  22. There should be a law when they us the words “Climate Change”, “Global Warming”, or “Climate Disruption”, they must pre-qualify it if they they are referring to it as Man-Made, so every one knows what they are really talking about.

  23. crosspatch says: Wrote
    January 15, 2011 at 12:15 pm
    “Apparently the “weather is not climate” maxim has been thrown out the window in a desperate attempt to salvage sinking public opinion on the issue.”

    “The difference is that coming out of colleges and universities we now have a crop of meteorologists who have been indoctrinated in AGW since kindergarten so to them it is “fact”. They know nothing different and only “kooks” question it. It has been driven into them as “known fact” literally since nursery school. So “unusual weather events” are connected to “climate change” would seem quite natural to them.”

    They call this Cognitive Dissonance.

    “Cognitive dissonance is an uncomfortable feeling caused by holding conflicting ideas simultaneously. The theory of cognitive dissonance proposes that people have a motivational drive to reduce dissonance. They do this by changing their attitudes, beliefs, and actions.[1] Dissonance is also reduced by justifying, blaming, and denying. It is one of the most influential and extensively studied theories in social psychology.

    Experience can clash with expectations, as, for example, with buyer’s remorse following the purchase of an expensive item. In a state of dissonance, people may feel surprise,[1] dread, guilt, anger, or embarrassment. People are biased to think of their choices as correct, despite any contrary evidence. This bias gives dissonance theory its predictive power, shedding light on otherwise puzzling irrational and destructive behavior.

    A classical example of this idea (and the origin of the expression “sour grapes”) is expressed in the fable The Fox and the Grapes by Aesop (ca. 620–564 BCE). In the story, a fox sees some high-hanging grapes and wishes to eat them. When the fox is unable to think of a way to reach them, he surmises that the grapes are probably not worth eating, as they must not be ripe or that they are sour. This example follows a pattern: one desires something, finds it unattainable, and reduces one’s dissonance by criticizing it. Jon Elster calls this pattern “adaptive preference formation.”[2] When the fox fails to reach the grapes, he decides he does not want them after all, an example of adaptive preference formation designed to reduce cognitive dissonance.”

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cognitive_dissonance

  24. Anthony

    Have you been re-educated that Kevin Trenberth’s first name is really Kenneth?

    Inquiring minds would like to know

  25. This seems more like a spoof. Are you sure it isn’t?

    If it’s legit, and indeed seems to be asking that only biased Ph.D.’s need apply, I can’t imagine anything worse than putting into place in our Ivory Towers biased researchers and scientists, who not only do the research, submit the articles, form the peer review club, AND serve as professional journal editors.

    Our only hope is that “We the people” have not become “We the sheeple”.

  26. Robert E. Phelan says:
    January 15, 2011 at 12:15 pm

    “It might be worth noting that the AMS annual meeting is scheduled for January 23-27 in Seattle.”
    Just in time for nice arctic cold front dipping down the West Coast in the form of
    a “Queen Charlotte Clipper.” with attendant wind down the Frazier River canyon
    where there is nothing between you and the Yukon but a few Sitka Spruce and
    Moose antlers…
    -snicker-

  27. Jeff Alberts says:
    January 15, 2011 at 1:01 pm
    ===========================================================
    latitude says:
    January 15, 2011 at 12:31 pm
    I’m all for it….
    If anyone thinks climate scientists can screw up a forecast….
    …just wait until they have TV weathermen doing it
    By the end of the first month, there won’t be anyone that believes………
    ======================================================
    Hate to break it to you, but TV weather folks are no better at predicting the weather 3 days out than climate scientists are at predicting 100 years out.

    ===========================================================
    amd Jeff, I hate to break it to you, but that was my point

  28. As Anthony might say, “KNEEL BEFORE ZOD!”

    I say, let ‘em go ahead & try….every attempt they make to tie local weather events to CAGW blows up in their faces & loses them even further credibility with the voting public!

    Ridiculous claims such as the recent NTY article blaming ongoing snowstorms on climate change are a good example….more recently, I see that the Arctic ice mass just isn’t cooperating, nor are hurricane forecasts. The harder these folks try to push their case, the worse it looks.

    What does John Coleman have to say about all this “meteorologist re-education,” I wonder?

  29. Pity it is so hard for US citizens to get visas to North Korea. The Grand Peoples Study House in Pyongyang would be the idea venue.

  30. latitude says:
    January 15, 2011 at 2:25 pm

    amd Jeff, I hate to break it to you, but that was my point

    Ah, ok. You made it sound like weather forecasts are currently accurate in any meaningful way.

  31. Michael says:
    January 15, 2011 at 2:02 pm
    crosspatch says: Wrote
    January 15, 2011 at 12:15 pm

    “A classical example of this idea (and the origin of the expression “sour grapes”) is expressed in the fable The Fox and the Grapes by Aesop (ca. 620–564 BCE).”

    An older and more learned example is the story of King David and Bathsheba. After his prophet Nathan explained to him “You are that man,” David ripped his garments, dressed in rags and covered himself in ashes. Hansen, Jones, Mann and the whole lot should be fortunate enough to go through the same experience.

  32. The reason weathermen don’t believe climate “scientists” is because weathermen have real experience about the vagaries of weather and instrumentation and climate “scientists” only have theoretical models.

    I doubt whether weathermen will change their view just because some academic tells them that their model predicts the world temperature to a fraction of a degree in 100 years time, when those same models can’t predict the local temperature in a few days.

    But I’m sure it will do the climate “scientist” good to get a solid grounding in practical climate/weather instrumentation/science!

  33. Just in case anyone was wondering WHO controls the media here is an interesting tidbit:

    JP Morgan controls 54 U.S. daily newspapers,and owns 31 television stations.
    JP Morgan: Our next big media player? (April 13, 2010)

    This is interesting because the U.S. Congressional Record February 9, 1917: shows J.P. Morgan interests bought 25 of America’s leading newspapers, and inserted their own editors, in order to control the media. Looks like the bankers are still keeping tight control.

    The world’s No. 1 investment bank in 2009 was JPMorgan Chase & Co…. JPMorgan Tops Goldman in Investment Banking as Fees Swell 13%

    Do not forget the leaked Danish text at Copenhagen that would have handed effective control of climate change finance to the World Bank. Chase was owned by the Rockefeller’s. Not only have three Chase bankers become the head of the World Bank, Rockefeller has also hosted annual luncheons at the family’s Westchester County estate for the world’s finance ministers and central bank governors, following the annual Washington meetings of the World Bank and IMF.

    The money trail is always fun to follow.

  34. Pamela Gray says:
    January 15, 2011 at 2:13 pm
    “This seems more like a spoof. Are you sure it isn’t?
    Our only hope is that “We the people” have not become “We the sheeple”.”

    We the sheeple it is because this nonsense is paid for with tax payers money without any protest.

  35. Jeff Alberts says:
    January 15, 2011 at 2:58 pm
    Ah, ok. You made it sound like weather forecasts are currently accurate in any meaningful way.
    =====================================

    LOL, noooooooooo

  36. Mike Haseler says:
    January 15, 2011 at 3:01 pm
    The reason weathermen don’t believe climate “scientists” is because weathermen have real experience about the vagaries of weather and instrumentation and climate “scientists” only have theoretical models
    =====================================================
    Mike weathermen get slapped down on a weekly basis….
    ..but, believe it or not, they actually try to give accurate predictions

    …Climate scientists move the goal posts, stay under their fluorescent lights, and claim the science is settled. They don’t even try to give accurate predictions, and don’t care.

    Again, these same climate scientists think it’s all in explaining it. Just haven’t explained it right yet.
    Like they really expect anyone to believe that there is one person alive, much less a weatherman, that doesn’t know all about it.

  37. thegoodlocust says: “They just keep on getting creepier and more desperate.

    Is it because they subconsciously sense the death of their religion or is some group like the Real Climate team pushing this crap behind the scenes?

    There a natural law that the number of workers who can contribute to a project is usually strictly limited, whilst the rate at which of hangers on** that join a “fad” is proportional to its apparent success.

    The result is that there comes a point in any project whereby the quantity of “hangers on” begin to exceed those with a real interest and the project aims and objectives begin to be modified to satisfy the requirements of the hoard of hangers on with a detriment to the original objectives

    Global warming has got way past that state! It is now there for the hangers on, it is there because it has to be there because they are there! The truth no longer matters: the only thing that matters is that everyone works to perpetuate the jobs of the hangers on!

    **(i.e. consultants, PR executives etc.).

  38. Lew Skannen says: Wrote
    January 15, 2011 at 2:58 pm
    “Pity it is so hard for US citizens to get visas to North Korea. The Grand Peoples Study House in Pyongyang would be the idea venue.”

    You almost made me wreck my computer by spewing my drink on it.
    +1000

  39. I say this is a good use of our tax dollars. I have yet to meet a skeptic turned warmist, I have turned many warmists to skeptics, so to me this is obviously a great opportunity to educate some airheaded activists.

  40. If this advertisement for the vacancy as described is real, my heart sinks, it really does.
    Have we as a Western society descended to such depths of academic depravity? Does ‘proper’ education no longer occur?
    I regret having to say this, and please snip me if necessary, but the only phrase that this solicitation for employment brings to mind is “Arbeit Macht Frei”.

  41. A long time ago, when I was at University as a undergraduate, I sometimes ran into people who I thought, to put it bluntly; must’ve been educated to become that stupid. They had been educated beyond reason, usually having spent almost their entire “career” cocooned in an artificial universe.

    What does not fit their theories and ideals of how things should be as they have been told, is beyond their perception. Everything that contradicts, must be wrong.

  42. Did you notice that the instructor has to have a PhD in a “relevant social or learning science discipline”? In other words, the theory is for an educator to explain to skeptical atmospheric scientists what is wrong with the atmospheric scientists’ understanding of atmospheric science!

    It gets more surreal by the week!

  43. From the ad: “Candidates must have a PhD in a relevant social or learning science discipline, and a track record of published journal articles and/or conference papers on relevant topics of inquiry including climate change communication, science communication and/or formal or informal science education.”

    So a PhD in science would not be qualified. A person with conference papers (so at least two; say, one at Copenhagen, one at Cancun) on informal science education would be qualified as long as they have a non-science PhD.

  44. Oh no they going to “empower” again! Baylor wants to empower the poor people of Belize. This Neo Marxist terminology has caught on in scientific organizations. Gee I’m a little worried about those more individualistic weathermen that refuse to be “empowered”. The indoctrinators may have them removed from their jobs. This oft-repeated notion of late of re-education sounds like something from the apparatchiks of a totalitarian regime. This is serious and worrisome stuff.

  45. Since they are losing the argument they need something to keep the ball rolling. SkS has a foolish article claiming that the unusually high snow is further proof of global warming.

    That crappy part is they are ignoring the perfectly normal snow extent for the year of 2010. Doesn’t mean they won’t try to tie every weather event to global warming.

    The good news is the more BS like this that they pull, the less the average person will believe the increasingly outlandish claims.

    http://theinconvenientskeptic.com/2011/01/snow-extent-for-2010/

  46. “In Orwell’s novel, all citizens of Oceania are monitored by cameras, are fed fabricated news stories by the government, are forced to worship a mythical government leader called Big Brother, are indoctrinated to believe nonsense statements (the mantra “WAR IS PEACE, SLAVERY IS FREEDOM, IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH”), and are subject to torture and execution if they question the order of things.”

    I didn’t think I’d see it in my lifetime. We need to add “WARM IS AGW”; “COLD IS AGW”;”EXTREME IS AGW”;”DROUGHT IS AGW”;”FLOOD IS AGW”; “STRESS IS AGW”;

  47. With a list of qualifications like that, why would the ideal candidate want to be TV Weatherman instead?
    Maybe they are looking for an answer to the complex hot foot that Piers Corbyn and Joe Bastardi have given them.

  48. The HR Office at the university where I work is offering Influencer Workshops under its Professional Development Opportunities. Here’s a bit from the blurb:

    “The ideas and techniques for the Influencer Workshops are based upon the books Crucial Conversations & Influencer. The ideas are that major problems can be changed by adjusting to a few behaviours. That to change behaviour requires helping to change the minds of people. Techniques are then used to show how personal motivation can be engaged to result the overcoming of reluctance & resistance. This is by connection to personal values. In essence, showing that the following techniques can effect change: create new experiences, create new motives, connect to a person’s sense of self, engage & connect to moral values.”

    When they continually cry poor why are universities funding this crap for their staff? Why do they need to change people’s minds and overcome resistance?

  49. kwik says: Wrote
    January 15, 2011 at 1:31 pm
    “Resistance is futile”
    “The Borg.”
    All Your Base are Belong To Us. I heard that before. Too Funny. I think it was from a Chinese translation error in a video game.

    The English translation of the word al-Qaeda is, The Base.

  50. Sam says:
    January 15, 2011 at 12:00 pm
    ..
    Teaching them how to attack meteorologists who don’t tow the line.

    Or toe the line, either. :D

    Dare one hope that this evokes a full-bore push-back complete with flamethrowers from the Meteorologists of the world? It would be a very educational battle!

  51. I suppose the conclusion of The Man-Made Global Warming Conspiracy.! essay is; The climate changing is not your fault.

  52. davidc says:
    January 15, 2011 at 5:44 pm

    “So a PhD in science would not be qualified. A person with conference papers (so at least two; say, one at Copenhagen, one at Cancun) on informal science education would be qualified as long as they have a non-science PhD.”

    Chances are the hire was made before the ad was written. The ad is just cya.

  53. ^Bernd

    This is how a psychiatrist has put it:

    The little children who make up the left side of the political spectrum have never learned that reality exists separate from their own wants or desires. They still want what they want when they want it no matter what. And they are prepared to stage a temper tantrum if Mommy or Daddy–or Reality, in this case–say, “No!”

    You can ignore reality, but reality will not ignore you.

  54. I suppose the conclusion of The Man-Made Global Warming ??????????.! essay is; The climate changing is not your fault.

  55. Around the time this was happening: http://www.thorntonweather.com/blog/climate-change/climate-scientist-knockdown-william-gray-versus-james-hansen/ , the AMS had a page in its education section which debunked CO2 being responsible for global warming – it quickly disappeared.

    Re-education is already in place because as every dictator knows, the educated are the first threat to any dictator’s survival. Destroying the credibility of the educated is resorted to here because impossible to organise enough firing squads, yet, together with introduction of AGW dogma into school curriculums to create an ignorant generation is par for this course. Well tried and tested methods.

    On this page are links to various articles: http://z4.invisionfree.com/Popular_Technology/index.php?showtopic=2050.

    Under “Scientist Polls/Surveys:” it has one survey saying, “85% of AMS Certified Weathercasters do not agree that most of the warming since 1959 is very likely human-induced”.

    The link takes this to an AMS page which can no longer be found by AMS: http://journals.ametsoc.org/archive/1520-0477/90/10/pdf/i1520-0477-90-10-1457.pdf

    So I don’t know which year this was done. In 2010 the picture had changed somewhat: http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/03/29/ams-sponsored-survey-of-tv-weathercasters-63-of-tv-weathercasters-believe-global-warming-is-mostly-natural/

    An effort was made to specifically attack the weathermen in the US in 2007 by a “Weather Channel Climate Expert Calls for Decertifying Global Warming Skeptics” on the http://epw.senate.gov/public/ Put Decertification into search and its the last three listed about this story.

    Re-education might take longer, but if they have the clout, and clearly they do, it’s a lot easier than a show down with those who still know the science. Those who continue objecting will probably be marginalised or quietly replaced. With MSM in their MSControl, we’ll probably only get to hear snippets.

  56. “will also adapt and test conflict resolution theory and practice to engage meteorologists who reject the scientific consensus and climate scientists in constructive dialogue. ”
    Wasn’t it Stalin who would encourage his advisors, ministers, and generals to have individual audiences with him to confide their concerns, opinions, and suggestions, so together they could improve the condition of the workers and the motherland.
    Stalin would nod approval and acceptance of what they confided.
    As the advisor left, Stalin would nod again to another “advisor”, who would quietly treat those visitors perceived as threats to a muffled gunshots to the temple.
    Of course, I don’t expect them to execute those who disagree with them (if their aim is as good as their models, there’s nothing to worry about), but they’re already composing a blacklist (see http://wattsupwiththat.com/2010/06/22/a-new-blacklist/ )
    I don’t trust these people.

  57. Weather is not Climate,
    Never forget.
    Unless it is, then change your bet.
    Weather kills but climate enriches,
    We pay your bills so mind your pitches.
    You’ll get it wrong, from time to time,
    but never mind,
    You’ll never have to defend a crime!
    We’ll make sure you’ll never lose
    ‘cos if you do our goose is cooked!

    And that will never happen. Ever!

  58. Good grief a center for climate change communication. So now the problem isn’t the science, its the communication. Sorry if the message is a lie it doesn’t matter how you package that lie, people will still know it is a lie.

  59. Wow, so now that want to churn out others to preach their propaganda. This is becoming less and less about science and more and more about mind control.

  60. “The project will integrate informal learning, mass communication, and experiential learning theories to develop and test new pedagogical approaches to informal science education through frequent mass media exposure, linked to realworld experience (i.e., the local weather).” PEDAGOGICAL? Babble on. Love the realworld weather reference. In previous years we have been lectured that weather is not climate and snow is a thing of the past, and this winter every event of weather is proof of AGW.

    Just follow the Chicago Way, vote early and often.

  61. Notice that they’re not asking for a candidate with a PhD in a relevant SCIENCE field, but in a “social science” field , the bastion of leftist propaganda.

    “Candidates must have a PhD in a relevant social or learning science discipline”

    Here’s a link to their site: As I said, this can be written off as leftist propaganda.

    http://www.climatechangecommunication.org/team.cfm

  62. “The goal of this project is to establish a national network of climate and weather science organizations, and university research and teaching programs, to engage, train, and empower local broadcast meteorologists to educate and inform the American public about climate change.”

    Sorry. You’re a day late and a dollar short. The American public takes its information directly from the weather itself, so unless you can control the weather outside of a computer model, you can’t fool the American public.

  63. “If ignorance is bliss, then wipe the smile from my face”- RATM . I’m all for a world government, I just do not believe we, as a species, are ready. We have much poop to put in a group.

  64. I am pretty certain that my favorite local weather guy David Spense is a skeptic, but he has a family and the network that he works for is firmly about the warming. I still like his manner though, and he seems like a nice fellow. He might be able to side-step the re-Neducation. One of us, one of us, …….

  65. From the Cliff Mass Weather Blog, a professor at Univ of Washington in Seattle.

    “Virtually all of these atmospheric rivers are connected with the jet stream (as shown above). Nearly all climate models indicate the jet stream will move north due to man-caused global warming. Does that mean the we will get less atmospheric rivers and LESS extreme precipitation as the jet moves north? That should be true for someone along the coast. This is why the simple arguments often provided by the media (global warming means more extreme precipitation and floods!!) may not be quite true for everyone. And here is an interesting tidbit…the number of extreme flooding events have DECLINED in northern CA and southern Oregon during the past fifty years. Is it already happening? Are we next for a dry out? My profession really has to get a better understanding of all this. ”

    Interesting comment.
    Terry

  66. Pink Floyd’s ‘The Wall” comes to mind.
    The AGW promotion industry is, thanks to modern tech rapidly becoming more pernicious than eugenics in its day.

  67. A Climate Change Communication Program?

    Yup, CCCP seems appropriate…

    In Climate Science, the carbon dioxide drives the temperature!

  68. “The goal of this project is to establish a national network of climate and weather science organizations, and university research and teaching programs, to engage, train, and empower local broadcast meteorologists to educate and inform the American public about climate change.”

    A few problems already:

    1. Local broadcast meteorologists work for organizations, that above all else, make money. Hope they can talk their LOCAL advertisers into putting money into a AGW biased production.

    2. Local forecasts mention LOCAL conditions and forecasts. If there were floods in Tasmania, and they try to tie that to AGW, viewers might just find another station.

    3. Most local broadcasts have very little time to get into anything more than local conditions, and maybe the 5 day forecast. The directors are going to find it hard to free up more time to allow the AGW talks.

    The market is going to have the final say as to whether or not the forecasters get on board. When the advertisers and viewers state their displeasure, the directors will change it.

    BTW, the best broadcast forecasting I’ve ever seen was on a network called the RAT (Rural Alaskan Television), now renamed the ARCS (Alaska Rural Communication Service: a system of satellite fed low power television transmitters providing free over the air service to 235 communities spread through all regions of the State of Alaska).

    This system is owned and funded by the State.

    What made their weather forecast so great was the fact that this one hour forecast doubled as a full flight (aviation) weather forecast. Trying to tie in a global warming aspect to those should go over real well…

  69. in australia the forcasters could not tell you what yesterdays weather was shame shame shame thay will start the forcast with a right hand salute

  70. “This project will focus on establishing a national network of on-air broadcast meteorologists, climate scientists, university research programs, and key climate and weather science organizations, to engage, train, and empower local broadcast meteorologists to educate and inform the American public about climate.”

    Pheww! Some days it just doesn’t pay to keep up with the news.

    So yet another institution named after a great person turns around and sullies their namesake’s reputation. Washington, Madison, Jefferson, Franklin. Mason. Nothing is sacred. (Sigh).

    Things like this make me wonder if was born into The Matrix or Carpenter’s They Live. Some days I feel like I was just released from cryo-prison in Demolition Man or just awoken into an Idiocracy. And as others mentioned above, this could almost be a ST:TNG Borg episode. Elements from each seem to apply in every direction! And there are probably a few I missed.

    Anyway, the totalitarians have not surrendered yet, we have more work to do. So let’s continue passing out red pills and sunglasses. Be well. Resistance is NOT futile.

  71. ‘to develop and test new pedagogical approaches to informal science education’

    I do wish they’d use more precise language because using terms like pedagogical sounds like they are teaching children, I think they really meant andragogical approaches. But then, maybe they are that condescending!

  72. Frank K, loved your spoof! Just a respectful suggestion though, you seem to have overlooked the importance of mime and interpretative dance in the communication strategies.

    I do wonder how graduates of this course will fare in the marketplace. Will an audience (and its sponsors) in the so called flyover States welcome this approach? I suspect not. Hence, Frank’s suggestion of incorporating event management, and mine of mime and interpretative dance, should be considered as constructive in terms of enhancing the employability of these graduates.

  73. ‘Robert E. Phelan says:
    January 15, 2011 at 12:15 pm
    It might be worth noting that the AMS annual meeting is scheduled for January 23-27 in Seattle.
    The theme of the 2011 AMS Annual Meeting is “Communicating Weather and Climate.” http://www.ametsoc.org/meet/annual/index.html
    A tour of the Meeting’s web site suggests that the move to re-educate meteorologists is well under way. Trenberth, Somerville, Pope, Cicerone, Emanuael, Karoly…. they’ll all be presenting.’

    Maybe the AMS Members should boycott the meeting and set up a protest in the lobby. Just a thought.

  74. @Michael says:
    January 15, 2011 at 1:27 pm

    You left out the most worrying personal part for most people, there children and CAGW education in schools. I have never seen a survey of people by age that believe in AGW but i’d put money on a high belisf in AGW in the younger generation as it was taught to them at a young age.

    I will admit i’m not an expert on AGW curriculum but i’d be interested if they gave the whole picture of the uncertainty in the theory.

  75. Just a couple of ideas for the NSF.

    I remember that during the Korean War allied prisoners were subjected to re-education by their Chinese captors. Dissent was punished by several days locked up in a blacked out shed. Most just demonstrated whole hearted agreement with their captors until they were released and free to curse them.
    In Morocco there was a Muslim zealot who had a 100% success in converting non-believers to Islam. They were bound and gradually lowered into a vat of boiling oil. If, or should I say when, they recanted the lowering stopped. History does not record whether this was classified as re-education.

  76. Having prostituted themselves to the global warming fraud they now want to put a prostitute in the guise of local weather talent under a shady lamp post in every TV and radio station .

    How long before affirmative action demands a global warming advocate be on each station for fairness and how long before advertisers are pressured to demand equal global warming time while reporting the weather.

    If this were to succeed it will make weather forecasting on an equal plane with astrology.

  77. It’s already in play. In the New York Times today is an article about an upcoming “Superstorm” in California which will flood the central valley among other things. It is by Felicity Barringer. In it is the paragraph, “Climate scientists have for years noted that the rising temperature of the earth’s atmosphere increases the amount of energy it stores, making more violent and extreme weather events more likely.” It is stated as if it it just fact not theory. Completely disregarding current evidence about lack of increase in storm strength and frequency, historical records indicating that periods of warmth tended to have fewer major weather events, and competing theories such as that the warmth tends to reduce the temperature differentials and thus reduces turbulance resulting in fewer storms.

    All in all it seems the meme that global warming is increasing the frequence and strength of extreme weather events is getting play and is becoming stronger.

  78. That’s “frequency” in the final sentence.

    Anthony, the article is about a conference by the US Geological Survey, Federal Emergency Management Agency, and the California Emergency Management Agency held in Sacramento. The article didn’t make clear whether the conference was focused on or motivated by the “increased risk” due to global warming or if it was in response to historical data about superstorms and flooding in California’s history and was just reasonable disaster management planning. It might be interesting to find out more about it.

  79. I propose that GMU adds supplemental field work with trips to Churchill, Manitoba to see the few remaining polar bears before extinction due to ah, climate change. And if the students and instructors can be filmed hand feeding those poor starving bears at the dump, then they can be awarded their degrees posthumously.

  80. The specter of government-sponsored “re-education programs” should be alarming. Do these bureaucrats and their bosses have any understanding of history? Maybe they do….

  81. Certain comments have been scrubbed from this thread comment section in a back and forth reference to another posters comment. A couple of youtube videos about Norman Dodd and David Rockefeller, etc.

    It is perfectly OK with me If done by the site owner. This post is just a heads up in case it wasn’t.

  82. “Weather is not climate, unless it benefits me” is a common way of thinking that is difficult to deal with from the outside, because the person using it feels justified in the double-standard. Obviously it is used outside the AGW context.

    It is almost impossible to correct unless your voice is louder than the speaker, and the AGW crowd still has a rhetorical volume advantage in the “public conversation,” for reasons of co-advantageous political considerations.

    Why does CO2 get the attention when H2O is the larger driver? Because controlling H2O, apart from the assumption of silliness, doesn’t allow you to control economic activity. In other words, attack CO2 and you have more allies.

  83. Shevva says:
    January 16, 2011 at 6:04 am

    I will admit i’m not an expert on AGW curriculum but i’d be interested if they gave the whole picture of the uncertainty in the theory.

    You can bet your bippy that they uncertainties are not even mentioned, and in fact are actively blocked from discussion. Parents have horror stories to tell of what happened to their kids if they dared question any part of The Narrative™.

  84. Great post, but “… relates to Dr. Kenneth Trenberth’s …” — isn’t that “Kevin”? I thought “Kenneth” was Dr. Briffa of Yamal fame.

    [Fixed, thanks. ~dbs]

  85. Michael;
    Well, a long post, but I guess it was justified. I’ve copied and saved it.

    BTW, for anyone wanting a fantastic tool for archiving copy/pastes, check out clipmate.com . I’ve used it for years, and wouldn’t be without it.

  86. That’s another bad news for American taxpayers. Endless use of tax money to further scare taxpayers so that they will pay more without question, like more carbon and energy taxes, more environmental regulation fees.

  87. Fascinating video, Michael, about the pushing of a political idea regardless of whether it is true or not. Quite relevant to the climate wars . . . Thanks too for the G. Edward Griffin piece.

  88. “It will also adapt and test conflict resolution theory and practice to engage meteorologists who reject the scientific consensus and climate scientists in constructive dialogue.”

    Nothing like a bit of intimidation to get forecasters to toe the line.

  89. Mighty fine article and posts here!

    What USED to be taught as “common sense” in the schools is now definitely lacking.

    The “Concensus-building” tactics I have heard about before. Thanks for the poster-piece(s) on that! Brought back some foggy memories of a couple of ‘social experiments’ we did in school years ago, centering on that very topic! Concensus-building is VERY undemocratic, and very much opposite to “Robert’s Rules of Order”-styled meeting methods.

    Good posts; all of them!

  90. Please dear God let them call it:

    The Ministry Of Climate Truth ….

    It’s a BAaaaad idea to try to intimidate the guys with the cameras and microphones who’ve been getting the predictions right…

  91. I see nothing wrong with opening a dialogue. I do find the “conflict resolution” wording odd. I am a part of the broadcast media and currently study climate science along with weather. Questioning science is healthy and any good climate scientist admits the uncertainty. Some things are known…some unknown. But both sides need to be more open to discussion. Just dismissing each other helps no one. Treating each other with respect and helping each other dig into the science and answer the questions is a good goal to have. That’s how I think the approach needs to happen.

Comments are closed.