I point you all (and especially you Phil) to this Blog by a local meteorologist in my area...

http://blogs.woodtv.com/?cat=11

He got his degree decades ago, so he's really old school, and from all reports is not very computer savvy. But he has great "telepresence" and the local viewers like, respect, and trust him.

That's the problem.

He uses his "official blog" on his television station's website to dispute global warming. He does nothing else but that. And everyone who reads his posts believe them completely.

And the worst part? He's a Christian Fundamentalist.

He is so entrenched in his own personal (and party line) dogma that he will not listen to dissenting opinions.

I just thought the august people here would like to take this fool on.

That is the worst usurping of the word "telepresence" that I have ever heard. Tell him that real telepresence is the satelite feedback system created by Dr. Robert Ballard in the 1980's for sharing the experience of deep-sea exploration live via computers.
No, wait, first ask if he knows who Robert Ballard is.

__________________
"If you think the LHC will create black holes, you might as well believe Hobbits are at the bottom of your garden."- Dr. Mike Inglis
Rovers forever! - ToSeek
"Carl Sagan sent a message to ET,
Neil Armstrong walked in the Sea of Tranquility
Steve Squyers built Spirit and Opportunity
Dan Haylen upchucked in zero gravity." -Brent Simon, The Space Camp Song

Sounds like a hopeless case. I would waste no time with him.

__________________
"A witty saying proves nothing" Voltaire.
"All your bias are belong to us" Ara Pacis.

I don't know, a quick read shows the sight to be fairly fact based (at least presented that way). The insistence on "concensus" in the discussion of global warming is the biggest obstacle to making real progress in dealing with it. Science is facts, not concensus.

I will admit that I am not qualified to evaluate the facts on his site -- just that they seem to be reasonably presented and not tendentious.

I also did not see where his religous beliefs fell into what he presented on his blog.

__________________
Observatorio de la Ballona

whats the space/astronomy angle here?

__________________
All Moderation in Purple

My point of view is that I run a business and have a very full life. I am not about to take trips out into the ocean taking scientific measurements, nor am I about to spend months or years studying climate science. So, yes, I form my opinions based on those of what seems to be a consensus within the field. My guess, is that the consensus will be right more often than the outliers.

The fact that he is a Christian Fundamentalist suggests that he puts more stock in religious faith than in science. Fine. There are things that I believe and respect more than science. But for matters of science, I'd rather go to the scientists than to him.

It's a pretty long blog. What specific items in the blog are you pointing out?

I fail to see where the items you mention are the problem. To be 'old school," to lack computer skills, to be liked, to be respected, to be trusted, to be believed, to be focused on an issue, etc. are not necessarily faults. What exactly is the problem you are referring to?

Why is this the worst part? Are some points he makes influenced by his religious beliefs? Which points?

What dissenting opinion do you feel he has ignored? Is that dissenting opinion relevant to the point(s) he makes in his blog?

It would be easier to take on this 'fool' if you pointed to specific statements that you consider foolish.

Good point. Should this be in off-topic babbling?

__________________
Observatorio de la Ballona

That is a very reasonable approach. But those who don't agree with a scientific "concensus" aren't usually ostracized as long as they stay within the forms of dialogue in the scientific community. The point I was trying to make was that extreme and overstated positions on global warming on both sides, name calling, etc., are making it harder to deal with a real issue.

If and only if there is evidence in his writing or presentation that his faith is taking the place of his scientific judgement. I saw no such evidence, and he is a trained meteorologist. I'm certainly not suggesting that you go to him for answers on global warming, just that there is no evidence that his religous faith is affecting his approach to the issue.

__________________
Observatorio de la Ballona

C'mon , Kevin, where's your guts? You don't need any help from these guys. Come on over to the comment section on Craig's blog so we can play whack-a-mole with you.

Good idea.

__________________
All Moderation in Purple

Mike M. - this isn't a forum for misplaced machismo challenges. In fact, I'd like to remind you that I don't see you posting here, and I think we both know why Also, the "whack-a-mole" taunt is a violation of our civility and decorum rules. Don't do it again.

Kevn - the CT section is for Conspiracies, in particular those having to do with Space/Cosmology. Your post is neither a conspiracy nor space related, however much the subject matter may be of interest to the BA. Also, discussion of religion, unless VERY specifically wrt science, is strictly prohibited in this forum. Using "Christian Fundamentalist" as an ad-hominim doubly so. Therefore, thread closed.

__________________
"I have this theory that the Apollo missions were faked when NASA found out that general relativity was wrong because the Earth was expanding due to the Sun's iron core being influenced by magnetic waves from the electric universe after being perturbed by Planet X and thereby causing global warming. Where should I start a thread about this?" ~ ToSeek

"Those are the people that wonder how a thermos knows whether to keep something hot or keep something cold." ~ NeoWatcher