Global Whining vs. the Truth
By Brian Sussman
"105° tomorrow? We'll be sending you out live," the television producer informed me.
Like most TV Meteorologists, I loathed the heat wave live-remotes. I would much rather work in a controlled environment, complete with air conditioning and a green Chroma-key screen. And during extreme weather events, the studio lent itself to professionalism rather than playing on emotion.
"Let me guess, the bank in Walnut Creek?" I said sarcastically. I had been through this drill many times.
"Perfect location. Plus, a lot of viewers with ratings meters out there."
Walnut Creek is an upscale town 30 miles east of San Francisco. It is sheltered from the cooling influences of the coast and the Bay by a modest mountain range. As a result, in the summer that region can bake. The bank not only referenced the name of the town, but had a thermometer that was several degrees off, thanks to the heat absorbing black asphalt on the adjacent multi-lane street and the pavement of the nearby parking lot. The producer knew 105° would easily read 110°. On air, I always quickly explained the reason for the soaring temperature reading for our audience, but it was not enough. The misleading visual message was absolutely clear: 110° in Walnut Creek-another sign of climate doom! No doubt about it, the climate was under assault. It had to be global warming.
No, it's global whining. Read More
As more and more people sit down and actually study weather records and the concept of global warming, there are more holes punched into the theory. As Congress debates a climate change bill, we must all be aware that there are more negative consequences to the passage of that bill than there are to the supposed climate change itself.