Forecastthefacts.org – Political Activists Gagging Our TV Meteorologists on Climate Issues

UPDATE: 1/23/12 11AMPST Exposed – Forecastthefacts.org is a George Soros funded activist website. See details below.

By Michael A. Lewis, PhD. and Anthony Watts

Some one or some organization is attempting to influence the upcoming annual meeting of the American Meteorological Society (AMS).

According to WCTV-TV’s story  Urging American Meteorological Society to Get Tougher on Climate Change, a program called Forecast the Facts is attempting to lobby the AMS to change their 5-year policy on climate change to a new policy “drafted by a panel of [unidentified] experts” (emphasis added).

A new campaign, Forecast the Facts (www.forecastthefacts.org), launches Sunday to pressure TV meteorologists to inform their viewers about climate change. The launch coincides with the kick-off of the American Meteorological Society’s (AMS) annual meeting in New Orleans, LA.

“This is an important moment in the history of the AMS,” said Daniel Souweine, the campaign’s director. “It’s well known that large numbers of meteorologists are climate change deniers. It’s essential that the AMS Council resist pressure from these deniers and pass the strong statement currently under consideration.”

The “Campaign Director” is identified as Daniel Souweine. The Forecast the Facts web site turns out to be a product of “Citizen Engagement Laboratory (CEL).”

And who is the Chief of Staff of CEL? You guessed it: Daniel Souweine. Here’s his Facebook page.

The web site describes CEL as: “a non-profit, non-partisan organization that uses digital media and technology to amplify the voices of underrepresented constituencies. We seek to empower individuals to take collective action on the issues that concern them, promoting a world of greater equality and justice in the process.”

But as we see elsewhere, in the green incubator building description of CEL at the David Brower Center at 2150 Allston Way, Berkeley, CA, that “non-partisan” claim doesn’t match this description:

So much for the “truth in advertising”.

They also go to trouble to obfuscate their website domain, here is the WHOIS results for forecastthefacts.org and .com:

Interesting thing though, is that when you check to see what other web servers are at the same domain IP address, you discover a whole flock of political activist websites:

Turn Off Fox, “bastadobbs” (to get Lou Dobbs fired from CNN), occupyhomes ( an occupywallstreet spinoff), and trail2010 (a website pushing a vote for the Dream Act) are just a few of the “non-partisan” websites run by the same outfit on the same server.

And then there’s the usual suspects friends of forecastthefacts.org

The CEL web site lists 350.org as a “Partner,” which describes itself as: “building a global grassroots movement to solve the climate crisis. Our online campaigns, grassroots organizing, and mass public actions are led from the bottom up by thousands of volunteer organizers in over 188 countries.”

Sounds like birds of a feather, even though they are both attempting to lobby a major national organization to change a policy that affects all of its members… from the top down. Hardly grass-roots organization. And hardly on behalf of “underrepresented constituencies.”

Evidently, grassroots meteorologists are insufficiently toeing the line when it comes to laying weather patterns at the feet of “global warming.” Someone unnamed wants them to publicly join the global warming bandwagon in blaming human CO2 emissions for observed climate change, ignoring the uncertainty of climate science, ignoring all evidence to the contrary, insisting on one single simplistic explanation for climate change.

Here’s the video where they roll out their immutable “weather is not climate unless we say it is” logic:

TV weather presenters, even those who are qualified meteorologists endorsed by the AMS, are the most visible source of public information about weather and climate. They appear daily to billions of people, and whether or not it is a good idea, their “opinions” about climate change carry a lot of weight in popular culture. It’s no wonder that those whose interests are served by spreading fear of climate change in support of a predetermined economic outcome are after these “grass roots” who fail to tremble in fear of natural climate phenomena.

This is not grass roots, this is Big Money come to the service of shadowy figures in the background of international politics and economics. Who profits from fear of climate change? Who is funding this program to gag independent meteorologists and TV weather presenters?

This is part of a concerted behind-the-scenes program funded by monied interests to subvert all elements of environmental awareness and activism to the cause of money and power, political and economic influence. Global warming hyperbole has been used to discredit free-thinking, independent scientific research, free expression, free thought and free action. The individuals and corporations funding this movement are laying the ground work for society controlled by corporate-government-military oligarchies to maintain the economic and political status quo.

Follow the money…

=================

Now here is where this campaign is likely to backfire, and backfire big. These activist dolts don’t know much about television news, or they would have figured this out ahead of time. I spent over two decades of my life in TV news, so let me (Anthony) tell it like it is.

The front page of forecasthefacts.org has a list of who has been naughty and the statement:

In order to convince meteorologists to forecast the facts, we have to know where they stand. So we’re tracking meteorologists’ attitudes toward climate change across the country.

They also want you to “rat out” your local TV weathercaster/meteorologist:

Know what your meteorologist thinks? Drop us a line: tips@forecastthefacts.org

They have a “methodology” for who gets on the list:

Forecast the Facts defines a denier as anyone who expressly refutes the overwhelming scientific consensus about climate change: that it is real, largely caused by humans, and already having profound impacts on our world. Forecast the Facts also includes meteorologists who have suggested that extreme cold spells or snowstorms disprove climate science. We track the views of meteorologists through their on-air statements, blog posts, social media activity, public appearances, interviews, and interactions with viewers.

I love this retarded logic: Forecast the Facts also includes meteorologists who have suggested that extreme cold spells or snowstorms disprove climate science.  The inverse logic of course that any meteorologist who suggests that a heat wave or drought “proves climate science” gets a pass.

Idiots.

What these bought and paid for CEL activists (and apparently also the American Meteorological Society) don’t understand is the following:

1. Most TV weathercast segments run 2:30 to 3:30 in length. Because they are done mostly ad lib, they are often called upon by the newscast producer to cut time after the news segments typically run long after live shots or wordy live interviews…I’ve done this thousands of times. Climate? – hardly ever enough time to even mention.

2. TV stations are about ratings, and ratings are what determine revenue. They really don’t give a rat’s patootie about climate unless it helps make a buck. Note the statistics cited by CEL – the public isn’t believing it either. If someone tries to challenge the TV station on the issue, the management will most likely instruct their news department and meteorologists to not say anything either way to avoid aggravating the viewers. As topics go, climate isn’t an important topic except to a handful of viewers, they just want to know when it will rain and if there’s a weather bulletin that affects them. Politicizing a “cause” in a weather bulletin will piss off viewers like you can’t imagine. They’d be fools to touch it with a 40 foot pole.

3. Television news is a fickle beast, more so that just about any occupation. TV weathercasters and meteorologists are almost all on contract, some as short as a year, some as long as three years. Will anyone who wants to get their contract renewed take on an issue from a shadowy political hack in Berkeley that will piss off about half their viewers? Not likely. Most TV weathercasters and meteorologists I know stay neutral on the subject on-air for this reason.

4. The CEL and AMS cite the weathercaster survey, which was put together by George Mason University. See my report on it here. Amazingly, these geniuses think that what weathercasters and meteorologists answer in a written survey translates directly to what goes on-air every night, yeah right. See 1-3 above.

5. CEL is making a “list” of TV weathercasters and meteorologists who aren’t toeing the line as the paymasters of CEL want them to. They are labeled “deniers” and called out by name. I expect letters will go out to TV stations and maybe also to letters to the editor of local newspapers. This sort of labeling and pressure will be a fatal move. Why? Because it is actionable. You see as I said above, TV stations are about ratings, and ratings are what determine revenue. And when some organization starts smearing the news team, that becomes actionable, especially if it coincides with a drop in ratings. Monetary losses can be shown, and linked right back to CEL’s campaign to calling the local weathercaster a “denier”. Most TV stations are group owned, and these media groups all have legal departments specifically trained to deal with this sort of defamation.

Personally, I hope some TV station sues the living crap out of these bozos and whoever is paying them to be a “non-partisan” activist that apparently doesn’t know the first thing about television news.

But, it will probably fail long before that, as the money for this silliness dries up because it won’t be effective.

In the meantime, here’s what I’d like to ask the readers of WUWT to do:

1. Email this article to your local TV weathercaster/meteorologist. Let them know they are going to be the target of a paid political activist campaign out of Berkeley that has nothing to do with the American Meteorological Society.

2. If you are a member of the American Meteorological Society, let them know how tacky and misguided this would be to get into bed with such an organization. If they do, consider resigning, because who needs this sort of stuff from an organization you pay dues to? This is Teamsters style thinking and ask yourself – how does it help you get your next job or keep the one you have?

I find the National Weather Association to be far more sensible and practical.

3. If you see your local local TV weathercaster/meteorologist listed as a “denier” on the forecastthefacts.com website, let them know so they can alert their legal department that they are being defamed professionally. Your local TV station website also has contacts for the news director and general manager, contact them too.

4. If you see letters to the editor in your local newspapers attacking local TV weathercaster/meteorologists, back them up with facts, and write a letter of support.

Help keep your local TV weather report free of political activisim!

Thanks for your consideration – Anthony Watts

===============================================================

UPDATE: Forecastthefacts.org (operated by Citizen Engagement Lab) is a George Soros funded activist website. Here’s the proof (h/t to WUWT reader Jan):

Source:  http://www.soros.org/initiatives/usprograms/focus/democracy/grants/social/grantees/cel

Further, the director of CEL’s forecastthefacts.org  Daniel Souweine, his Facebook page has an interesting exercise in selective censorship.

He agrees that the Protect IP act is a bridge too far in censorship, but thinks it is OK to shut down free speech and open discourse on the public airwaves by targeting TV meteorologists and weathercasters who don’t toe the line on their view of climate.

What a guy!

UPDATE2: The AMS has no plans to pay any attention to these guys, nor the petition they submitted. This from the AMS blog, bold mine:

A Statement on Statements: Works in Progress

Today at its annual January meeting, the AMS Council will hear a report from a committee of expert members on the progress of a new revision to its Information Statement on Climate Change.

To say that the AMS’s current statement on this topic is “oft-cited,” particularly by advocates of strong action to mitigate and adapt to climate change, would be an understatement. It represented the best of climate science when it was adopted in February 2007, and includes such wording as:

strong observational evidence and results from modeling studies indicate that, at least over the last 50 years, human activities are a major contributor to climate change

And

increases in greenhouse gases are nearly certain to produce continued increases in temperature.

But despite the importance of keeping the public up to date on advancing climate science, don’t expect any major decisions in New Orleans. In fact, adoption of the updated Statement isn’t even on the Council’s agenda.

Actually, approval of the update would be forbidden by Council policy that requires a 30-day period to allow comments by members.

Advertisements

  Subscribe  
newest oldest most voted
Notify of
Rhoda Ramirez

Thanks for the heads up Anthony. There’s a LOT of money behind the AGW movement, isn’t there.

Kohl P

This really is like McCarthyism isn’t it?
I find it quite shocking.
Kohl P

Honest ABE

Manipulation like this is why I’m skeptical of the “consensus.”

Patagon

What a shameful witch hunting by this self proclaimed stassi.
By the way, does any body know the result of the recent online survey of AMS members attitude to AGW?

crosspatch

James Rucker: “James recently co-founded the Citizen Engagement Laboratory, an incubator for new online organizing efforts using the model of ColorOfChange, largely focused on empowering currently underserved identity and issue based communities. 

”
And I notice that Daniel Souweine keeps turning up at things where Fenton Communications people turn up. Not surprising since this organization seems to be following the Fenton blueprint perfectly. The idea is to spin off a bunch of organizations which are actually, for all practical purposes one organization, but gives the appearance of several “grass roots” organizations. The word “Citizen” helps, too.

Call them.for what they are…aren’t they trying to force people into consensual groups that follow somebody else’s opinion, never ever think for themselves, and actually cooperate to punish all dissent?
Believe it or not, that IS the definition of Fascism.

I think this is really cleaver! It is so over the top, so Orwellian, so Big Brotherish, it will repell TV Weatherman in the opposite direction and might even make some local reporter do a double take. My hat is off to the Big Oil guys who dreamed this up. 😉

As soon as the ad hominem “climate change denier” comes out, you know right away that you’re dealing with ideologues… I’m not sure they deserve the attention they are given here. It is best to ignore most groups of this type… It would be like giving PETA lots of publicity each time they come out with a new thought bubble.

Steptoe Fan

I had no idea, i’m living in Germany and it’s 1937 !

Hoser

I can’t resist: It’s pronounced Swine.

CodeTech

I’m all for “free speech”, but isn’t this about one step short of rounding people up to shoot them?
Or, to put it another way, it’s like yelling “FIRE” on a crowded planet…
On the other hand, any thinking person that has this pointed out might actually come to the realization that this whole thing has very little to do with “Science”. As has been pointed out here before, Meteorologists are probably far more hands-on when it comes to weather and climate than any “climate scientist”, the fact that the majority are “deniers” should say a LOT.
We are being swamped by “progressives”, they light a ton of little fires and by the time we’ve stamped them out a whole new set are burning. I’d say Marx and Lenin would be proud.

CinbadtheSailor

I see Joseph McCarthy continues his work to root out these evil people

Beth Cooper

Dear Citizens’ Engagement Laboratory.
You say that you are a distribution channel for key progressive messages. I ask you two questions: ” Do you think it is a democratic move to invite citizens to dob in their local meteorologists?” ” As a ‘progressive’, would you consider the practice of witch hunting to be ‘more’ or ‘less’ atavistic than affirming citizens’ constitutional entitlements to free speech?
I look forward to your early response.
Beth Cooper.

In a way, this is very good news. It indicates that enough TV Meteorologists are speaking out on their doubts about global warming to have a significant influence on public opinion. So the activitists now feel the need to campaign to get us under control. On the other hand, it is very disturbing. Many TV Weathercasters will undoubtedly pull back to protect their positions and not create any problems for career advancement. This will ad stress to our lives, that is for sure. But, be good scientists, fellow TV Meteorologists. CO2 is not a pollutant and is there is no scientific proof that is now or ever will cause uncontrollable global warming.

Christopher Hanley

(Trying to be a pale imitation of the hero of the Yes Minister series Bernard Woolley) “Forecast the Facts” is an oxymoron — you can’t forecast facts.
“Prediction is very difficult, especially if it’s about the future” Niels Bohr.
‘…The CEL web site lists 350.org as a “Partner,” which describes itself as: “building a global grassroots movement to solve the climate crisis…’. The use of imposing sounding titles (Citizen
Engagement Laboratory), acronyms (CEL), buzzwords (350.org), catchphrases etc. are dead giveaways that they are the products of highly paid PR organisations.

I am surprised these people could stoop so low but they have obviously been taking special bending and stretching exercises!

Why should we get upset about this? Forecast The Facts is as American as motherhood, apple pie, and witch-hunting.

SSam

It’s really too bad that our local station is already in a contemptable state. In order to get decent LOCAL news I have to watch a station 40 miles away. The local one is actually that bad.

Sparks

Small typo, “Local” is printed twice! “3. If you see your local local TV weathercaster”…
I agree, local weather forecasters should not be pressured this way, it’s wrong on all levels.

MikeH

It’s sort of funny, in the screenshot of the web page, their header states:
Forecast the Facts, is your meteorologist blowing hot air?
I didn’t know AlGoracle was a meteorologist?
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2425631/posts#4

Charles Gerard Nelson

I think they have mis-underestimated the mood of the the populace (as is so often the case with Warmists, who occupy group-think, ideology bubbles.)
There was a time when being accused of being a ‘Denier’ might have been considered scary…things have changed since then.
I’m thinking of having lapel buttons made…stating
I’m a Denier…ask me why!

Isonomia

It’s a well known fact that many meteorologists are “deniers”???
It’s a well known fact that many meteorologists know that computer models are often wrong!
It’s a well known fact that many meteorologists can see for themselves that none of the forecasts of warming from 2001 have been correct.
On the positive side you could argue they got the 1980s and 1990s right. On the negative side, they were still going on about global cooling in the 1970s and gave categorical predictions on warming which singularly failed to materialise in the naughties. So … 2 out of four when the prediction is either right or wrong with around equal chances …

SunderlandSteve

I was struck by the completely disingenuous question “Do you believe there is solid evidence the earth is warming?”
Whether you believe there is or isn’t is totally irrelevant as the dispute is about cause, not effect. Thus a lot of respondants may well answer yes to the above question, but if the question asked “Do you believe there is solid evidence that Co2 is causeing dangerous, runaway warming?” the answers would be entirely different.

strange
For me, a WHOIS for forecastthefacts.com reveals what you show above, but a similary enquiry for forecastthefacts.org is null (using http://whois.arin.net/ui/query.do)
.com and .org point to completely different IP’s
is the .com just a red herring?
Andy

MikeH

Another observation about their name, isn’t it sort of an oxymoron? To forecast is to predict, to calculate. And in a weather forecast, it is based upon a statistical probability. But the only ones that I know that predict facts are fortune tellers and palm readers. Maybe I can classify the web site Forecast the Facts in the same category as the charlatans in those fortune telling booths at the county fairs?
They are good for a chuckle, but it’s dangerous to follow their advice.

spangled drongo

It was always about money, ideology and power, Never climate or science:
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v480/n7377/full/480292a.html

cb

Ah, but it turns out that McCarthy was RIGHT. As opposed to the AGW-politicos who are WRONG.
Kindly stop insulting someone who was, when everything was said and done, just another victim of hippies demonizing those who would dare to expose their evils. In fact, McCarthy could easily serve as a poster-child for this kind of tactic (AND as to just how effective they are) by the never-to-be-sufficiently-damned hippies.
As a matter of fact, McCarthy was trying to take a stand against the SAME kind of people who are behind today’s political game of AGW.

Alan the Brit

I seem to recall Mr A Hitler in his little tome, Mein Kampf, saying that “the mass of the people are more likely to believe a big lie rather than a small lie”. If you’re gonna tell porkies, tell whoppers, & do it bare faced too!
“non-partisan organization that uses digital media and technology to amplify the voices of underrepresented constituencies. We seek to empower individuals to take collective action on the issues that concern them, promoting a world of greater equality and justice in the process.”
Oh dear, “non-partisan”, “empower indivisuals”, & “collective”, the dead giveaways imho! Rather reminds me of the fairly old joke about Pime Minister Blair, you know that multi-millionaire socialist who told us all that “people were’nt putting enough away for their old age” & santcioned annual billion pound raids on private pension schemes, & who wants to impose repression of the rest of us, “Hi, I’m Tony, I never tell lies, whoops there’s another one!” 🙂

Here in Australia all weather reporters I hear read from the IPCC/BoM/CSIRO page. It is rare to hear a whisper counter to that. For example although I am in Canberra – I get the Sydney TV weather – and the guys are almost hysterical that Sydney is having an average January – keep on talking about heat to come. It is sad. I gather that in the US there is still more independent thought.

These alarmists are certainly well organized. However, doesn’t there come a point when increasingly frenetic activity like this to target weathermen who are, by training and background, bound to be on the sceptical side, become counter-productive?
Organization and entryism has always been a strength of the Left but sometimes these cadres are a little too clever for their own good. There is a limit to the power of activists to mobilize or change opinion in the face of the evidence of the senses. I think that limit has been reached already, hence the ever more desperate struggle against popular opinion. I think that this campaign and the one to get Climate Change Denialism treated like the teaching of Creationism in Schools will have effects opposite to those intended. The “tipping point” in public opinion against climate alarmism has already been passed.

Martin A

Face it. The climate change religion is here for good. It reached critical mass of fervent and activist believers years ago and it is not going to fade away.
There are so many indoctrinated schoolteachers and schoolchildren, so many people whose living depends on its continued existence, so many of the rich and powerful who profit from it – and so many fervent believers that it’s hard to see it being forgotten.
In two thousand years from now, when deniers point to that fact that the world has not warmed significantly, they will be told that that just confirms the effectiveness of the measures taken.
*If* the climate change religion does ever come to an end, it will because of having been laughed at and ridiculed: http://uncyclopedia.wikia.com/wiki/Global_Warming

meemoe_uk

Nice call to arms article by Watts and Lewis.
One possible weakness is the TV stations sueing FtF as an oversight by FtF. The money for the AGW religion is coming from international bankers, and I reckon its quite easy for international banker funded groups to appeal for unlimited law court funding, which overwhelms what ever budgets the TV stations have for their sueing department.

afizifist

Im predicting this is so stupid that they will quickly withdraw or be asked to withdraw it by the AGW team

Watermelons.
Now tell me communism has disappeared.
Not gone, just morphed into green environmentalism.

old44

“It’s well known that large numbers of meteorologists are climate change deniers.
I’m confused, we were given to understand ALLscientists agreed the science was settled.

DirkH

spangled drongo says:
January 23, 2012 at 1:39 am
“It was always about money, ideology and power, Never climate or science:”
Wow! Nature has Fred Singer and Arno Arrak in the comments and doesn’t censor them! What’s happening?

Warwick Hughes says:
January 23, 2012 at 2:00 am

Here in Australia all weather reporters I hear read from the IPCC/BoM/CSIRO page. It is rare to hear a whisper counter to that. For example although I am in Canberra – I get the Sydney TV weather – and the guys are almost hysterical that Sydney is having an average January – keep on talking about heat to come. It is sad. I gather that in the US there is still more independent thought.

Average? Not in my dimension. The historical average high is 26C. We may reached that a handful of days in January, and rarely topped it. Most of January is like December was, 21C to 24C maximums.
Time to head for the tropics before the glaciers move in. I am not looking forward to winter down here!

If that menagerie of pressure groups is “non-partisan”, I wonder what leftist organizations they would acknowledge are partisan. They’d probably choke trying to name even one!

dave ward

I visited the site and voted “No” in the poll on Global Warming. That brought up the Vimeo presentation, which says “You are part of a growing number of people who doubt global warming”. The respective figures (wherever they are derived from), are 2006 – 77% Yes / 23% No and by 2011 – 63% Yes / 37% No. This appears to be an admission that their message is failing. I downloaded the clip, and I took screenshots, just in case!
I used some of the tools included with Flagfox and, like you, got nothing of use with Whois. “Geotool” gives their server as “Slicehost LLC ” in Saint Louis, Missouri.
“Same IP” lists:
presente.org
turnofffox.org
trail2010.org
gettingcovered.org
videothevote.org
occupyourhomes.org
engagementlab.org
basta287g.com
“Domain Tools Traceroute” gave 9 hops (from the UK) ending at engagementlab.org

Jerker Andersson

Is that really legal in the US? I mean to track peoples opinion and make public databases of it?
In Sweden I doubt it would survive a trial.

Michael in Sydney

“…Forecast the Facts defines a denier as anyone who expressly refutes the overwhelming scientific consensus about climate change: that it is real, largely caused by humans, and already having profound impacts on our world…”
If you fail one criteria do you fail them all?
As a interested observer of geological processes I believe in climate change, I believe it has had profounds impacts on our world but I’m not sure of the extent of human impact on these processes although I do not deny that humans could influence the climate – therefore am I a denier?
Cheers
Michael

Here is a list of facts that I know are true
1) er
Can anyone add to this list.

dave ward

I visited the site and voted “No” in the poll on Global Warming. That brought up the Vimeo presentation, which says “You are part of a growing number of people who doubt global warming”. The respective figures (wherever they are derived from), are 2006 – 77% Yes / 23% No and by 2011 – 63% Yes / 37% No. This appears to be an admission that their message is failing. I downloaded the clip, and I took screenshots, just in case!
I used some of the tools included with Flagfox and, like you, got nothing of use with Whois. “Geotool” gives their server as “Slicehost LLC ” in Saint Louis, Missouri.
“Same IP” lists:
presente dot org
turnofffox dot org
trail2010 dot org
gettingcovered dot org
videothevote dot org
occupyourhomes dot org
engagementlab dot org
basta287g dot com
“Domain Tools Traceroute” gave 9 hops (from the UK) ending at engagementlab dot org
Mod Note; 2 previous attempts to post this failed, I’ve now altered the URL’s to hopefully avoid the spam filter.
[yep, worked this time – sorry I’ve been a tad rushed so haven’t check SPAM for past hour – but you have 2 there I will delete ~ac]

ozspeaksup

weather dudes on strike? they soon will be:-)

Latimer Alder

The CEL seems to be located on a building called ‘The David Brower Centre’
http://www.browercenter.org/tenants/working
This centre boasts
‘operable windows’
and
‘non-toxic carpet’
which supposedly lead to ‘reduced absenteeism and greater efficiency’.
I cannot take it, or its inhabitants seriously.
Sent from my home office in UK, also with ‘operable windows’ and carpet that hasn’t poisoned anything yet.
Aren’t eco-loonies hilarious?

eyesonu

Anthony, thank you for presenting the facts.
It is truely alarming that the issues you reveal relating to ‘global warming’ are likely happening in other areas in our society. Very scary indeed.

eyesonu

If they had a position for reporting of the ‘Believers’ i would report the clown on one of my local stations.

MikeH

Anthony stated:
Personally, I hope some TV station sues the living crap out of these bozos
That might sound like something we’d all like to see, but I don’t know if it is really actionable. If the meteorologist publicly states he/she doesn’t believe in AGW, and the web site lists the names and stations they are on, I’m not sure where that goes afoul of the law.. As long as they don’t do something stupid like providing their home address and directing them to harass the meteorologist, they may be within the law… That’s my non-lawyer opinion..
All I can hope for is that they just keep making fools of themselves and we keep educating the public of their inconsistencies and the outright fraud in their hype.
I’m not a lawyer, but I’ll play one on the internet…

redneck

Forecast the Facts defines a denier as anyone who expressly refutes the overwhelming scientific consensus about climate change: that it is real, largely caused by humans, and already having profound impacts on our world.
But if they refute doesn’t that mean… oh nevermind

nano pope

“It’s essential that the AMS Council resist pressure from these deniers and pass the strong statement currently under consideration.”
Sigh. Another case of warmist projection. I think we all know which of this debate is actually applying considerable pressure with considerable funding and resources while the other holds a quiet vigil. I guess all the tv specials and dedicated news segments arent enough, they need that two minutes a day as well to push their message. It’s a pity they can’t afford their own advertising campaign…