Lest readers think I’m the only TV meteorologist to speak my mind on climate issues, there are others, such as Jym Ganahl in Columbus Ohio.
The Daily Kos posted an article here calling for this:
Columbus Weatherman is a Kooky Global Warming Denier
Contact NBC4 and urge them to send weatherman Jym Ganahl to some climate change conferences with peer-reviewed climatologists. Let NBC4 know that they have a responsibility to have expert climatologists on-air to debunk Ganahl’s misinformation and the climate change deniers don’t deserve an opportunity to spread their propaganda:
NBC 4 phone # 614-263-4444
NBC 4 VP/GM Rick Rogala email: rrogala(ATSIGN)wcmh.com
And it was all over this story in a minor weekly newspaper in Columbus, OH., reprinted below. Jym could probably use a little support right now. His email: jganahl [at] wcmh dot com
From “The Other Paper” MEDIA MORSELS: Ganahl debunks the global warming
 |
| Be afraid of the sun, not carbon: Ganahl, seen here with what appears to be some sort of glacier, doesn’t buy the hype |
Just when you thought it was safe to assume that everyone had pretty much accepted climate change and moved on, here comes rogue NBC 4 chief meteorologist Jym Ganahl to blow your freaking mind.
“Just wait 5 or 10 years, and it will be very obvious. They’ll have egg on their faces,” Ganahl said this week of global warming advocates.
The “global warming hoax” is an obvious fallacy, Ganahl said in a YouTube video posted Jan. 23.
In the video, taped at a meet-up of the Ohio Freedom Alliance, Ganahl chats with Dave, the self-proclaimed No. 1 biker talk show host on radio, and—still odder—Robert Wagner, a former candidate for the 15th congressional district.
Although global warming is clearly “a fallacy,” Ganahl told the dudes, “It is remarkable how many people are being led like sheep in the wrong direction.”
Evoking Orwellian mind-control power of the media, Ganahl said it’s remarkable how easy it is to panic the unwashed masses.
Ganahl continued to evangelize offline this week.
Sunspots—and not carbon emissions—are to blame for the slow warming of the globe, Ganahl said. “It has nothing to do with us.”
“When there are sunspots, like freckles on the sun—dark spots—these are like turning on a furnace and the earth warms. When there are no sunspots, it is like the furnace is in standby and the earth cools.
“I have always thought we should celebrate and be thankful we live in a time when it is warmer, not curse it,” Ganahl said. “It allows us to grow food and feed the population—and the warming is slow and we can adapt to it.”
Cold, on the other hand, is to blame for a whole host of worldly disasters, including death of the Aztecs, the Vikings, and who knew?— the bubonic plague.
“Instead of screaming global warming, we should be preaching global cooling,” he said.
But with a new president who apparently buys into the whole carbon emission demonizing scam, Ganahl said, “It’s very scary,” and admittedly “very difficult,” to fight the mob mentality.
“Carbon dioxide is what we, as people, exhale. Enough said. Unless you eliminate people, you have it. It’s food for the plants and trees,” he said.
Our local Al Gore antithesis risked his career on his wild weather heresy—sort of.
Back in 2007, the take-no-prisoners field of meteorology was split over the issue of climate change. Prominent Weather Channel meteorologist Heidi Cullen called for those who deny the so-called truth about global warming to be stripped of their American Meteorological Society credentials.
Ganahl, who just celebrated 30 years at NBC, became the youngest person to be granted the AMS Seal of Approval, by the way, back in 1970.
Cullen’s call has thus far gone unheeded, but it stirred up a mini-schism among TV weather types.
“Meteorologists are among the few people trained in the sciences who are permitted regular access to our living rooms,” Cullen said in a column written for the Weather Channel.
“And in that sense, they owe it to their audience to distinguish between solid, peer-reviewed science and junk political controversy.”
Ganahl says he has kept his anti-global warming propaganda out of your living room, but he is prepared to sell on sunspots, and their relation to warming cycles, if you ever ask.
Asked if he’s worried that he’ll take a hit among the sheep for his climate thinking, he said he’s not concerned.
“Just tell them to wait five or 10 years, and I’ll have history to back me up.”
Leif Svalgaard (20:50:10) :
Jeff Id (18:01:15) :
“BTW it takes large amounts of power to induce current into wire.
No. A few TeraWatt are enough.”
Science humor is great…….
Not an attempt at humor. Storms this strong occur perhaps once per decade. The power of an average hurricane is 100 times larger and there are about 500 of these per decade.
Of course, the power levels of natural events are big. Everyone knows that. The way you throw out a few terawatts is what makes it funny. Not everyone does solar calculations that often.
Inadvertent science humor is even better.
BTW, On a more serious note, thanks again for taking the time to explain your perspective.
– the sun doesn’t account for global warming
– we cannot feed the entire planet
– we need to cut back on industry and people
To Jeff:
You have to separate between goal and method. There is no contradiction in for instance using industrial power to end industrial power. Possibly an ethical one, but only if you reject industrumental ethics.
The problem with the internet is that it’s full of people who pretend to be philosophers, but don’t acknowledge logical argumentation.
I’m still waiting for evidence to disprove the fact that solar power does not count for today’s climate changes.
[snip – none of that suggestion – Anthony]
Global Warming doesn’t account for Global Warming.
Actually with more CO2 and longer growing seasons we can easily feed billions more. We’d have no trouble feeding anyone if it weren’t for corrupt governments, regional warlords, etc. We throw away probably as much food as we eat in some western countries.
You can tell when the Kos kids are in town. The tone of the discourse immediately takes a nose dive into angry simple-minded hystericism.
Actually Jeff, you’re incorrect there, too:
Resource use would plummet in developed countries while rising in many of the poorest. (Surely we could not deprive the latter of the chance to raise their standards of living?) But it wouldn’t get us to 1.8gha. At 2.6gha, Mexico’s footprint is 32% too high. A drop to the level of Botswana or Uzbekistan would put us in the right range.
But that’s not low enough. We’d next have to compensate for UN projections of 40% more humans by the middle of the century. That would mean shrinking the global footprint to under 1.3gha, roughly the level of Guatemala or Nigeria.
There’s more. The GFN authors point out their data is conservative, underestimating problems such as aquifer depletion and our impacts on other species. In response, the Redefining Progress group publishes an alternative footprint measure which has humanity not at 25%, but at 39% overshoot. But that too, the authors concede, is an underestimate.
http://commentisfree.guardian.co.uk/john_feeney/2008/05/return_of_the_population_timebomb.html
Let’s see some evidence please, not empty talk.
I would love for Mr. Ganahl to come into the Gulf Coast states and take a walk with me along the 50 miles or so of devastated land that was caused by Hurricane Katrina and the flooding afterwards. Hurricanes are a huge consideration of life in this region of the United States, and a constant reminder that we are at the mercy of nature. I would especially enjoy Mr. Ganahl’s explanation of how the rising sea levels and the heightening of global temperatures would be a GOOD thing for residents of cities such as New Orleans, Baton Rouge, Gulfport/Bilouxi, Mobile, and Point Clear, who would be several feet under water by the year 2100 (http://gristmill.grist.org/story/2008/12/17/113915/50) if predictions are accurate.
For those of you who believe that economic growth is the answer to everything, I should mention that the American Southeast has been one of the fastest growing portions of the country economically for the last 5 years. Most of the new automotive plants have been built here because we have a historical dislike of labor unions and still maintain a mechanically inclined workforce. I should also mention that the farmland in the Southeast is some of the richest in world, being fed, as it been for several million years, by a confluence of rich silt from various river systems. To flood this area, as an unchecked and unrestrained rise in global temperature would do, would choke out the resources necessary to feed the CURRENT population of Americans.
However, economic growth cannot continue as it has. The resources are not there to sustain it for America and Canada, and certainly not for China and India. In order to maintain any semblance of dignity and order in our lives, we must commit to REDUCING our level of industry if nothing else. If industrialization continues at its current pace, the Gulf of Mexico will become a silent graveyard, a dead zone caused by runoff from mega-agrobusinesses (http://www.brighthub.com/environment/science-environmental/articles/12044.aspx) and industrial waste.
The use of harmful fertilizers would not be necessary if the human population to feed was smaller but that is a whole other can of worms.
Jeff Alberts (13:40:10) :
“Actually with more CO2 and longer growing seasons we can easily feed billions more. We’d have no trouble feeding anyone if it weren’t for corrupt governments, regional warlords, etc. We throw away probably as much food as we eat in some western countries.”
Consider the imminent wars caused by water shortages, the extreme weather events caused by the disruption to the climate, the use of genetically modified crops with unknown health risks and lower nutrition; the acidification of and overfishing of the oceans; the wild species going extinct as humanity encroaches upon them and the pollution caused by human waste and industry. Not only that but the birth rate of the better part of humanity is less than half that necessary to perpetuate their kind, partly because they are so anxious not to add to the population burden. The population continues to grow however because the absence of responsible people creates opportunities for the least responsible to expand – spreading from populous nations to those with negative birth rates. And charity multiplies misery.
Another sign that the Kos kids are in town is that you are treated to a collection of the worst possible scenarios to everything. Not only is the sky falling, but its doing so at a higher rate than ever before due to rational people going about their normal business.
Sorry, I will try to resist in the future. It’s just too easy.
Firstly, there is no evidence that any of the things you mention can even happen. But you’re covering several different subjects which are fairly unrelated. But I won’t bother refuting each one, since gratuitous assertions can simply be countered by gratuitous assertions. So, unless you have evidence that there will be water shortages due to “Global Warming”, or any of the other things, your gratuitous assertions have no merit.
The debate over climate issues wears us down, but there IS a way to find the truth.
This world can be confusing and often leaves us feeling lost. We are bombarded nearly every day by the media with “doom and gloom” stories ranging from government corruption to climate instability. After awhile, we grow tired of the endless debating and figure it’s all best left to the experts. In a sense, this is justified because we have other things to worry about (family, etc.), but in another sense, we know deep inside we’re giving up. We’d like to know the truth, but we’re lost as to how.
The good news is that you (as well as everybody else) already know how to find the truth. This isn’t egalitarian dogma — it’s something people like Socrates passionately died for. However, most adults ignore the truth and don’t bother finding it (for fear of becoming an outcast, lack of time, lack of immediate benefits). Granted, most of us aren’t brilliant minds and even if we did decide that these climate issues are real, we wouldn’t know the first thing to do, would be without a clue, without a solution. This further discourages us and we give up again.
Another thing that prevents us from becoming closer to reality is our consumer culture, which essentially says, “Society stinks and work sucks, but at least sitcoms and junk food provide pleasure.” This conditions us to pursue immediate pleasures, all the while completely unaware that we live out our lives like addicts. And who actually wants to find truth anyway? Who actually wants to be wrong? Who actually wants to make their beliefs vulnerable and take time to critique them?
Finding the truth isn’t easy, but it’s definitely worth it, and knowing that you tried your best brings you an inner peace. Finding the truth isn’t easy, but it’s not nearly as complex or intellectual as it’s puffed up to be. You can do it. The first step is to change your thinking, not to a new way, but back to an old way. Remember when you were a child, always running around, playing, exploring, learning, and asking questions? That’s exactly the sort of thinking you need again. Forget all that mumbo jumbo about self-discipline or any sort of morality. That’s not what’s needed for finding the truth. What’s needed is a playful, creative, brave, and honest mindset.
Finding the truth can be rather horrifying, depressing, or even boring, but it can also be incredibly comforting, inspiring, and fun. To learn more about how you can think creatively and clearly, as well as how to make a decision on who to believe in this messy climate debate, please spend some time watching the videos on this high school science teacher’s YouTube channel:
http://www.youtube.com/user/wonderingmind42
I really hope his videos help you see things more clearly. His videos are pretty easy to understand and he doesn’t obfuscate his viewers. You don’t have to be initiated into philosophy or science or anything, as he intended to reach as many viewers as he could, because he feels the issue is that important.
And in the end, that’s what questioning is all about: Finding what’s important in our lives, what’s real, so that we may have meaning.
Timothius (23:32:27) :
A good propaganda effort for the consensus view of AGW. I stopped watching the video when it started butterin up the scientific organizations.
The fallacy lies in that even if there is global warming, there is no proven anthropic contribution to it.
We might as well sacrifice a virgin to get propitious winds for our trip.
Talk about missing the point.
Sure, we can debate climate change all day, but it doesn’t change the fact that our reckless growth is damaging the environment.
Everyone here seems to have dodged that self-evident truth, maybe because it’s offensive?
Maybe because it isnt evident jane. Take off the gloom goggles and check it out. You’ll be a brighter, happier person for it.
@Gary Young gulrud (15:54:43) :
““WE MUST REDUCE POPULATION AND INDUSTRY IF WE WANT TO SURVIVE.”
A volunteer?”
Nahhh… It’s always everyone ELSE that needs to get off the planet.
BTW, who’s “WE” and who are the rest that get the short straw?
Jane Greenwood (15:24:20) :
Consider the imminent wars caused by water shortages, the extreme weather events caused by the disruption to the climate, the use of genetically modified crops with unknown health risks and lower nutrition; the acidification of and overfishing of the oceans; the wild species going extinct as humanity encroaches upon them and the pollution caused by human waste and industry.
Wow. That’s a lot of stuff to worry about all at once. Try to enjoy life now, there’s plenty of time for worrying when you’re older. I still live by this rule, and I’m already older.
Not only that but the birth rate of the better part of humanity is less than half that necessary to perpetuate their kind, partly because they are so anxious not to add to the population burden. The population continues to grow however because the absence of responsible people creates opportunities for the least responsible to expand – spreading from populous nations to those with negative birth rates. And charity multiplies misery.
I really don’t like the racist undertone in this part of your post.
@ur momisugly anna v
I think it’s important to remember that most of us here aren’t spreading “propaganda” but that we’re all simply saying what we honestly believe. Just because I believe there IS an instability in the climate at least somewhat caused by mankind and link to a video supporting my belief, doesn’t mean I’m spreading “propaganda”. Most of us have no reason to log on to the internet and lie. I also think it’s odd that you stopped watching the videos as soon as he mentions the top scientific organizations.
I think it’s best if we actually took the time to fully explore each side’s arguments rather than fleeing back to our beliefs, all the while name calling and making odd accusations. That’s the true propaganda. So I am willing to fully listen to your side without acting immature, so please link some stuff to look into. Remember, this isn’t about taking sides, this isn’t a sport or a contest or a fight. It’s about finding the truth.
And of course, even IF “global warming” isn’t a real threat, there STILL REMAINS the threats of desertification, coral bleaching, deforestation, topsoil erosion, habitat destruction, loss of biodiversity, toxic and radioactive materials, PCBs in every living cell, dysfunctional rivers, lakes, and seas, gigantic slag heaps and quarry pits…
And even then, there STILL REMAINS far off threats of GM crops, depletion of fisheries, acidification of the top ocean layers, etc.
So it’s most important that we see the big picture as well.
@ur momisugly tallbloke
I think it’s an odd accusation you make toward Jane Greenwood when you tell her to “enjoy life”. Do you know her? Do you know if she enjoys life or not? And just because she mentions those issues doesn’t mean she isn’t enjoying life. In fact, it could mean that she enjoys life so much, she wants to do what she can to have it continue and flourish for all life! Besides, how do you know she doesn’t enjoy raising awareness to issues and solving them?
I also think it’s odd that you accuse her of having a racist undertone simply because she is pointing out a real symptom of globalization and real population trends, rates, and migrations. This isn’t about racism or any form of blaming the Other. Even if it were, it would be the first world exploiters to blame anyway, not the third world victims.
Remember, we’re scared and so our tendency is to create an Other to blame and fight. Let us instead seek truth in a cooperative spirit.
Cheers.
Timothius:
Timothius, you’ve got it all… click
The problems you cite are either non-problems, or temporary problems.
It is the anti-progress folks who fail to see the big picture. Despite your hand-wringing, people are living longer, people are healthier, people have more to eat, and people are wealthier than ever before in history.
No progress happens without temporary problems. But dwelling on the down side will only make you more miserable. Progress is good. A small amount of global warming is good. More atmospheric CO2 is good. Cheap energy from coal and hydrocarbons is good.
And all the Daily Kos sniveling and whining in the world won’t change the fact that people are better off under the current economic model, than under the really bad big government model the new globaloney purveyors want to replace it with.
@ur momisugly Timothius:
Thank you for making that clarification, I couldn’t have said it better myself.
@ur momisugly Harry:
Please see earlier posts–I’ve provided lots of evidence to support my view. Have you?
For the record, Leif seems to have slight double-standards, since on a different topic he says:
“The proxy is 10 year averages and includes a fair amount of noise so you would not expect detailed correspondence.”
(here: http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/03/05/ipcc-20th-century-simulations-get-a-boost-from-outdated-solar-forcings/ )
However, as soon as one points out correspondence between sunspots & global temperature, then *poof* he suddenly wants detailed correspondence….