Cleveland-area TV meteorologists disagree with prevailing attitude about climate change

Clearly, I’m not the only TV meteorologist (former) with doubts. Here is a story out of Cleveland that shows how others think about the issues. – Anthony


Cleveland-area TV meteorologists disagree with prevailing attitude about climate change

Posted by Michael Scott/Cleveland Plain Dealer Reporter

December 02, 2008 22:35PM Categories: Environment, Real Time News

They will tell you when the skies might rain or snow in fickle Northeast Ohio, when to bundle up the kids in a cold snap and when to make weekend plans if steady sunshine spans the five-day forecast.  They also will tell you that human-caused global warming is hogwash.  They’re your local TV meteorologists.

Andre Bernier, Courtesy of WJW Fox 8

“This cry that ‘We’re all going to die’ is an overreaction and just not good science,” said Andre Bernier, a meteorologist at WJW Channel 8. “I don’t think I personally know any meteorologists — here in Cleveland or anywhere else I’ve worked — who agree with the hype over human-induced warming.”

The local TV weatherscape is indeed populated with on-air personalities who are pushing hard against the prevailing winds of climate science.  That prevailing thought — supported by the United Nations’ 1,200-member Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, the National Academy of Sciences, the American Meteorological Society and others — is this:

The Earth’s climate overall is warming and the human burning of fossil fuels in cars and industry — which release carbon dioxide — is helping to accelerate that change.  Further, climate experts say, there could be dire consequences if humanity doesn’t quickly lessen the accumulation of greenhouse gases and adequately adapt to a warming globe.

The American Meteorological Society has strongly affirmed that stance, but accredits even the on-air meteorologists who rail against it.

“Our stance is pretty clear on this and we’re in agreement with the global warming scenario as set out by the international panel,” said Keith Seitter, AMS executive director.

“Still, we think they should research all that they can,” he said. “And really, there should be less and less skepticism out there as the science improves each year — not more.”

Prime-time doubters

But, there are doubters — all AMS certified — in prominent on-air positions at each of the four Cleveland television stations.

, Dick Goddard

Bernier and Dick Goddard — the patriarch of Cleveland weather forecasters — predict the weather at WJW Channel 8. Both cite natural fluctuations in the Earth’s climate and dismiss the industrialization of the 20th century and the subsequent spike in atmospheric carbon dioxide as the cause for warming.

Goddard compared the current anxiety over warming with the global cooling concerns of the 1970s, which have since dissipated. He and Bernier both point to solar cycles as the key ingredient in climate change.  Bernier also said he believes the climate is no longer warming — but, rather, cooling again.  “I have a hunch that in 10 years we’re all going to be longing for global warming because it will be so cold,” Bernier said. His Web site, andrebernier.com, links to a Canadian documentary that suggests the same.  Others in the skeptic camp include meteorologists Jon Loufman at WOIO Channel 19, Mark Johnson at WEWS Channel 5 and Mark Nolan at WKYC Channel 3. Nolan has since moved to the news desk, but he said he still gets questions about his skeptic’s stance.

“Climate records also show that long before industrialization, the Vikings had settled in Greenland because it was warm enough,” said Loufman, who has taught meteorology courses at both Case Western Reserve University and Lakeland Community College. “I think the jury is still out on this.”  So what in the name of the National Weather Service is going on here?

Do the local weather guys know more than an international committee of several thousand climate scientists? Or are they too blinded by lake-effect snow squalls to see the big picture?

Widening rift?

For starters, the drift away from global warming among TV weather forecasters is hardly limited to Cleveland.  “This is nationwide,” said Stu Ostro, meteorologist and director of weather communications for the Weather Channel in Atlanta.  AMS chief Seitter agreed: “I’ve seen the trend, too,” he said. “But I still don’t understand why there would be more skepticism among the TV meteorologists than in the field overall — but there is.”

The most notable example of dissent among meteorologists has been the Weather Channel’s founder, John Coleman, now a TV forecaster in San Diego.  Coleman — whom Seitter quickly points out remained with the Weather Channel for only a year in the early 1980s — has said human-induced warming is “the greatest scam in history.”

There have been others, from the longtime director of the National Hurricane Center to Accu-Weather.com’s long-range forecaster, who told The Plain Dealer that “global warming is being forced down the throats of the public.”

Source of dissent

So what’s behind all of this?  Dick Goddard said the answer is that weather forecasters appreciate better the lack of reliable records.  “There’s only one constant, and that’s change,” he said. “We’ve only got accurate weather records back to 1874 and things have been changing back and forth since long before that.”  Bernier said local meteorologists “are just more practical” and not swayed by the opportunity for more grant money to do more research proving climate change.

But Seitter, a former skeptic himself, said meteorologists who make daily weather calls have a natural rivalry with climatologists who look at longer-range trends.  “Those of us in weather are used to seeing extremes all the time,” he said. “Why should we think that anything is different today just because one day is hot, another day has heavy rains? Meteorologists often see those things as natural variability.”  Seitter said many meteorologists also don’t trust models — “because we’ve seen how wrong they can be in predicting weather” — and that most don’t interact with other scientists beyond other meteorologists.  “We sort of live in our own world and haven’t been exposed to the same volumes of research that the climatologists have,” he said.  “And that can sometimes lead to a rivalry among the two groups — where some meteorologists are defensive and some climatologists might be condescending, or at least come off that way.”

Jay Hobgood, head of the Atmospheric Sciences Department at Ohio State University, agreed. He said the university teaches the IPCC findings on global warming, but allows for debate.  “The day-to-day meteorologists are seeing anecdotal evidence, but not the research that goes back thousands of years,” he said. “The two disciplines are very related, but the time span being looked at is very different.  “Looking at the daily weather doesn’t necessarily tell you the climate is changing.”

0 0 votes
Article Rating

Discover more from Watts Up With That?

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

84 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Wondering Aloud
December 3, 2008 1:59 pm

I agree with Anna v in first comment. It seems to me that it takes a lot of courage to question the scenario of catastrophic global warming as jobs and grants have definitely been lost. This tends to make those who do stand up to the exageration and hype to perhaps over react and be more certain than their position merits. This is met by over reaction and expressions of certainty where none exists on the part of the “believers”. Frankly their jobs and grants are on the line too. Where do they go to get funding if they admit now that the case is exaggerated.
This quote is interesting:
“I don’t think I personally know any meteorologists — here in Cleveland or anywhere else I’ve worked — who agree with the hype over human-induced warming.”
Is he lying? I don’t think so. In my own professional circle the divide seems to be between those who agree with Bernier and people who want to stay very very quiet on the issue. But, meteorology is not my circle, for me they are Physicists and Astronomers.
I remember a long time colleague dodging a question from me at a seminar in 2006 when it appeared that the cosmic ray data he had was strongly supportive of solar variability correlating with temperature. I believe his group refused to publish for fear of funding loss and as this was not the focus of the research they could avoid it. It wasn’t that they didn’t notice it was that they didn’t want their project to be associated with “Deniers”

Jeff Alberts
December 3, 2008 2:12 pm

I don’t think the IPCC is made up of 1200 anything, much loess climate scientists. it’s made up of a handful of politicians. If they’re referring to the expert reviewers and lead authors, they are no IPCC members or employees or anything like that, they simply provide expert opinion, and as far as I know are appointed by countries who are asked to provide the experts by the IPCC.
So the article was poorly researched, to say the least.

Jeff Alberts
December 3, 2008 2:14 pm

Speaking of TV weatherpersons. CNN has now stooped to having an “EXTREME WEATHER” spot in the lower right corner when the weather person is on. It seems to show temps for places which they apparently deem to be warmer than “normal”, since there was no showing of places that were very cold or getting a foot of snow. I guess this is in line with their alarmingly alarmist “Planet In Peril” pieces, which tend to be nothing but alarmist pap, totally ignoring most of the actual facts about climate.

ROM
December 3, 2008 2:23 pm

If a survey on the levels of belief or skepticism in global warming was done on the basis of by professions there might be some surprising conclusions.
Amongst Australian farmers and I would suggest farmers everywhere, a type of profession that is totally outdoors based and totally weather reliant both short term and long term, you would be hard pressed to find more than a tiny percentage that believe in global warming.
They all believe in climate change, that is real climate change, not the pseudo variety that is now passed off as a dangerous phenomena in place of the non provable CO2 induced global warming.
Farmers and other outdoor, weather and climate reliant professions have watched the weather and climate come and go all their lives.
The vagaries of the weather changes and the changes in the longer term climate as distinct from weather changes is a part of the folklore of succeeding generations of farmers.
Farmers simply do not swallow the simplistic and arrant nonsense on global warming / climate change that is promulgated by so many academics who should know a lot better.
In our modern western society so many people now work all day in air conditioned offices, then feel the effects of the weather for only a few minutes while heading for their transport home be it a public transport or auto, and on reaching their home they immediately move into an airconditioned or a warmed building.
Most of our population is now remarkably isolated from the effects of weather and climate on their personal lives and even more isolated on the effects of weather and climate on their needs in food, clothing and shelter.
It becomes reasonably easy to convince these people by a constant propaganda bombardment on global warming and its alter ego, the so called climate change, that the world is going to hell in the proverbial bread basket unless the true path is followed as laid down by the high priests of global warming.

jae
December 3, 2008 3:48 pm

““The day-to-day meteorologists are seeing anecdotal evidence, but not the research that goes back thousands of years,” he said.”
LOL. The research that goes back thousands of years show the same thing, if you ignore the rigged, pseudo-scientific hockey-stick crapola. Warming and cooling over decades and centuries. There is pretty unequivocal evidence that the Medieval Warm Period was at least as warm as the present period.

Tom in Florida
December 3, 2008 5:17 pm

Just a question on the ceramic roof paint. Can you walk on it without doing any damage to it’s properties?

George M
December 3, 2008 5:57 pm

Tom in Florida:
Generally, no, if the underlayment is even the tiniest bit flexible.

crosspatch
December 3, 2008 6:35 pm

The coating is basically like rubber. You can walk on it. It is like a rubber coating that goes right over top of the shingles.

crosspatch
December 3, 2008 6:48 pm

Note that the coatings are not ceramic, they contain very tiny ceramic spheres (about the size of dust) in an elastomeric binder that can expand and contract quite a lot, it is designed to be flexible. If it is applied properly on a properly prepared surface, it is no less durable than the shingles it is covering.

Editor
December 3, 2008 6:59 pm

TerryS (08:19:23) :
The American Meteorological Society has strongly affirmed that stance, but accredits even the on-air meteorologists who rail against it.
But, there are doubters — all AMS certified
Is it just me or does this look like a veiled threat – toe the line or lose your AMS accreditation?
At a “public listening session” held by the NH climate change task force, A Union of Concerned Scientists member mentioned the AMS document, which led Joe D’Aleo to bitterly criticize the way the AMS Council developed and forced it past the more technical members. Then Fred Ward, long time Boston TV met, pointed out that not only did the membership not have a say in it, but many members can’t get the satisfaction of leaving the AMS because the AMS certification is very important in some TV markets.
(An Associate of Joe’s said very similar things about the National Academy of Science’s statement.)
I don’t personally know how important the AMS certificate is these days. I don’t think I’ve ever seen one on screen in New England, where you pretty much need to qualify to describe the region’s weather. Before moving here and before college, I grew up in northeast Ohio and a lot about weather from Dick Goddard on Ch 3, KYW. After KYW and WKYC were forced to trade locales, WKYC came with Wally Kinnan. Eventually Dick Goddard came back, this time on Ch 8 and we had two AMS-certified weathermen. Such a deal! The weather person on Ch 5 also did the kiddie show in the afternoon.
At any rate, Heidi Cullen isn’t on the AMS council, so certificate holders are probably safe as long as keep sending in the dues.

Roads (08:07:44) :
Come on, let’s get a grip. These are TV presenters, after all – presumably the meteorologists who weren’t smart enough to get the research positions.

Perhaps that’s true in your market, but I’ve watched Todd Gross a couple times prepare his segment for the 11 PM news when he was at WHDH in Boston. He doesn’t begin to look at the models until he’s looked at current conditions, steering currents (and noting where new lows will form and where the surface manifestation will be), and basically leave me completely in the dust. After all that, he doesn’t look at other people’s forecasts to avoid the distractions of where they may have misread stuff.
When I moved to New England, my search for the best weatherman ended when Bruce Schwoegler warned that his forecast for the night’s snow storm would disagree with the NWS. He based it on one off-shore buoy’s wind report that showed the storm had passed the buoy so the snow would stop hours before the NWS expected. He was exactly right, and I watched him for the next decade.
TV mets in New England are not mere presenters….

Tim L
December 3, 2008 9:12 pm

George E. Smith (09:25:32) :
COOL daddy ohs so cool!!!!!!
I would bet one hundred he can not do it.
lol just one station and predict temps.

Chuck Bradley
December 3, 2008 9:17 pm

And Bruce Schwoegler is one of the 31,000 signers of the AGW is false petition, but I did not notice any Boston on-air weather reporters joining him.

papertiger
December 3, 2008 9:33 pm

The article says this is a country wide phenomina – with TV meteorologists overwhelmingly calling BS on global warming.
You know what would be fun?
A petition, signed just by TV, Radio, meteorologists.
Sort of an Oregon petition for weathermen.
If Tom Laughlin says it’s bunk, I’ll believe him. If Mark Finan said it’s bumkiss, you can take that to the bank.

mr.artday
December 3, 2008 9:37 pm

About roofs, my house in So. Cal had a hip roof and an attic space not big enough to stand up in. The strip shingles were dark green. That thing was an oven, even in winter. I would have loved to put in soffit vents and a ceiling fan to bring that heat down into the house from fall through spring. What stopped me was the naked fibreglass batts I had installed between the ceiling joists to qualify for a $300 rebate from So. Cal. Edison when I went all electric back in 1968.

Tim L
December 3, 2008 9:53 pm

Gary (10:35:18)
I seen this first hand at this company.
http://www.meijer.com/home.jsp
I have worked over a 30 year period there
and they had a meeting claiming to be bankrupt in two years
had they not done anything…. what they did was to hire a company
that did not know anything about the business to reorganize.
they did not ask any one at our level what might be done,
and they told us ” we don’t want to here about your problems with the new system”
we have lost a good place to shop and work, they have lost thousands of customers!
oh well

Richard Hegarty
December 4, 2008 12:59 am

To quote Bob Dylan “you dont need a weatherman to know which way the wind blows”. Weather predictions are tested every day by a skeptical public where as climate predictions are accepted as unquestionable facts and can only be tested after decades if at all.
Here is an interesting interview on the most famous forecast ever made by the BBC which failed to predict the great storm of 1987 which hit southern England.
Part1 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v74zAlK2hUU&feature=related
Part2 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L5GdGKQn45Y&feature=related

M White
December 4, 2008 2:56 am
Arthur Glass
December 4, 2008 5:17 am

“And really, there should be less and less skepticism out there as the science improves each year — not more.”
Just as, one presumes, skepticism about the Ptolemaic account of the movement of heavenly bodies was lessened as more accurate observations were mad in the 15th c.
Not!

james griffin
December 4, 2008 10:01 am

1) Graphs show the planet has cooled overall for the last decade.
2) Ice is returning to the Arctic and other areas.
3) Good snow last winter for skiers (even Scotland had a good season).
4) Early snow this year in US and many parts of Europe.
5) Cool summer in many parts of the southern hemisphere..some snow in Kenya I believe.
6) Aqua satellite launched in 2002 found no hot spots in the Troposhere and showed CO2/water vapour reaction took place at low altitude.
7) Warm Sun Cycle 23 has given way to a cooler cycle 24.
Cosmic rays affecting ozone layer so not out of the question that they do indeed stimulate cloud cover and rain fall.
8) Previou temp records, especailly the 90’s being down graded not just because Anthony corrected them but because Hansen has to show them on the increase….so put previous figs down.
Sad and pathetic.
Just how do we account for so many “experts” telling us the planet is warming?….probably because I did not get paid for offering this information, whilst AGW’s have their jobs, lifestylkes and reputations to protect.
As weil as trying hard not to undermine taxes and carbon offset trading that their bosses demand.

December 4, 2008 10:49 am

I grew up in Cleveland watching these two meteorologists on the news. And I agree with them. Global warming is hyped up more than what it should be. I mean, wasn’t it back in the 1970s that people were claiming there was a massive global cooling and that we were on the verge of another ice age?
I think it’s cycles of the earth’s climate; I am sure though that pollution doesn’t help things, however I don’t blame the “warming” all on humanity. I’m glad that there’s a significant number in the scientific community doubting its validity.

Pamela Gray
December 4, 2008 12:06 pm

Hey OSUprof!!! My Alma Marta! I was there as a 17 yr old in 1973. A bright but too young and not very smart feminist who wrote letters to the editor that resulted in a call from the PE department head. I was complaining that the money provided to the sports department for women was left over urine from the men’s sports program. Yes, I was a hothead. Go figure. Redhead. Just as a side note, because of my age, as a freshman I was assigned to Nun Hall (aka West Hall) without a door key and a 10:00 curfew. I was kicked out my second year due to very bad grades. I didn’t go to class because there was so much other stuff that I was interested in and freshman/sophomore classes were DULL. I just showed up for the tests. Didn’t even buy books. My GPA was a whopping 1.15. Lost all my college money. But I managed to convince the powers that be to take me back spring term and they took the bait. From then on I kept to my studies and just let the other stuff go by the way side. It was a hard lesson for a straight A girl from a small ranch who could pull a calf out of a cow’s rear end but couldn’t manage to pull a college class A out of her own. However, by the time I finished my masters, I ended up getting my research published in a major journal. It’s even on line. You can google it with “Fausti, Steven A, or Gray, Pamela S. The title is “Rise Time and Center-Frequency Effects on Auditory Brainstem Responses to High-Frequency Tone Bursts”.

Admin
December 4, 2008 1:35 pm

Pamela, if that were a personals ad I would already be stuttering.

Pamela Gray
December 4, 2008 2:28 pm

(blush)
An on-line romance on a Weather blog. Now that’s titillating! We could have a steamy conversation about gating a signal! Or using filters to narrow a frequency band! LOL!

Admin
December 4, 2008 3:01 pm

I cannot abuse my position as moderator with such an impressionable young girl. I’m sorry, it’s not to be.

Pamela Gray
December 4, 2008 3:08 pm

Reminds me of a song, “…young girl get out of…”. (rushes to the store to get another box of “cover that gray” rinse).