Like many people, I’ve been disappointed with the Weather Channel’s format lately; the focus on personality and an ideological portrayal of green issues, especially global warming.
They have placed a bet on global warming’s truth and seemed to have abandoned scientific inquiry and the doubt necessary to sustain it in the process.
Apparently, I’m not alone. John Coleman, the founder of the Weather Channel feels much the same way as he watches from the sidelines. Now that the Weather Channel has changed hands, he wants the matter to be settled by lawyers, claiming in part:
“If the lawyers will take the case – sue the people who sell carbon credits. That includes Al Gore. That lawsuit would get so much publicity, so much media attention…I feel like that could become the vehicle to finally put some light on the fraud of global warming.”
Sue Al Gore? That sounds a little intense. I’m not sure global warming arguments are entirely false or fraudulent either.
As for Gore, I’d be happier if he’d sit down and think about what use he still has for the rest of us.
As for the Weather Channel, like you, I just want the weather. I’m sure many people at the Weather Channel feel the same way. Maybe it’s just bad management.
See Also: The Weather Channel’s Green Blog: A Little Too Green, Climate Debate Daily, and also Stu Ostro’s posts, which shows how useful, intelligent and fascinating weather can be when it doesn’t come in ideological packaging.