Skip to content

Global warming update: Cleveland (meteorology) rocks!

February 16, 2007

In the wake of this global warming (global climate change) hype storm, it takes a panel of meteorologists from Cleveland, Ohio to inject some sense into the debate.

ice flowsThe Plain Dealer tells of a global-warming discussion with area meteorologists Tuesday, that made some very good points to consider (points in bold):

It’s not that Mark Johnson, Dick Goddard, Mark Nolan, Jon Laufman or former Cleveland weatherman Don Webster disbelieve the data entirely.

But they’re skeptical, and they don’t believe that it’s necessarily our fault or that we should panic over it.

“We have maybe 100 years of data on a rock that’s 6 billion years old,” said Johnson, a WEWS Channel 5 weatherman. “Mother Nature tends to even herself out, and the fact is, the Earth is cyclical.”

Goddard, WJW Channel 8 meteorologist, said scientists have flip-flopped on the matter: “I have a file an inch thick from 30 years ago that says the planet was cooling,” he told the crowd of several hundred.

They cautioned listeners not to put too much stock in what they said was an insufficient history of warming.

“The term global warming’ strikes fear in the heart of people every time you say it, but it’s simply a rise in temperature over time, and it’s happened before,” said Nolan, meteorologist at WKYC Channel 3. “I’m not sure which is more arrogant for humans: to say we caused it or to say we’re going to fix it.”

Laufman, who has free-lanced for WOIO Channel 19 and taught meteorology courses at several local colleges, including Case Western Reserve University, also referenced history.

“There was also a significant spike in world temperatures during the 1400s — and that was well before the Industrial Revolution,” he said “We haven’t studied it long enough to know what causes global warming.”

Bingo! I still believe that the fact that we were scared about global COOLING just 30 years ago makes me think that the hype around global warming could fade in a similar way.

For example, take this report recently released from Ohio State, showing that the rising temperatures predicted for Antarctica did not materialize:

COLUMBUS , Ohio – A new report on climate over the world’s southernmost continent shows that temperatures during the late 20th century did not climb as had been predicted by many global climate models.

This comes soon after the latest report by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change that strongly supports the conclusion that the Earth’s climate as a whole is warming, largely due to human activity.

It also follows a similar finding from last summer by the same research group that showed no increase in precipitation over Antarctica in the last 50 years. Most models predict that both precipitation and temperature will increase over Antarctica with a warming of the planet.

David Bromwich, professor of professor of atmospheric sciences in the Department of Geography, and researcher with the Byrd Polar Research Center at Ohio State University, reported on this work at the annual meeting of the American Association for the Advancement of Science at San Francisco.

“It’s hard to see a global warming signal from the mainland of Antarctica right now,” he said. “Part of the reason is that there is a lot of variability there. It’s very hard in these polar latitudes to demonstrate a global warming signal. This is in marked contrast to the northern tip of the Antarctic Peninsula that is one of the most rapidly warming parts of the Earth.”

To me, it seems like for every piece of science that global-warming-theory advocates come up with, it gets debunked with science at a later date.

So, all of this warming news is just debunking the global cooling hype from the 70s, right?

  1. February 16, 2007 1:25 pm

    Thanks for a bit of common sense on the subject. See my blog on the subject at or at

  2. February 16, 2007 6:12 pm

    Thanks Jerry….much obliged!

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: