TV weathercasters will soon need AGW certification if they want to talk about climate change on the air, according to a new initiative started by a South Carolina meteorologist. On National Propaganda Radio this morning was a segment on climate change lamenting that it’s not getting much traction in the public mind lately. The piece made clear that there was only science behind promoting the ‘reality’ of AGW, and just “disgruntled” troglodytes who refuse to accept truth. Nowhere was there a hint that the debate is not over, or that there were any material weaknesses in the popularized AGW case (here).
So, to bring the public around to a more compliant stance on AGW, there is work afoot for broadcast weathercasters to get certified on climate change before they can talk about it on their weather forecasts. Of course, certification will require that you swallow Team Gore’s version of the UN’s IPCC reports hook, line, and sinker. As for the public, we recall the song from South Pacific, “… they must be carefully taught.”
Public debate, as often reflected in the blogs, seldom leads one away from heat to light. In the 19feb13 WSJ’s section on healthcare you can see blaring examples of dysfunctional discussions. For example, “Should all women over 40 get annual mammograms?” is answered YES with “catching cancer early improves odds of beating it”, and NO with “the benefits are small but the costs can be great.” Now there’s a case of apples and oranges that is oh so common in the public round. The winner of such debates will be determined by hyperbole, emotion, and repetition. And some idiot legislator will then introduce a bill to get government involved at great cost to most, with resulting benefits to the fewest.
No one, it seems, can gather their wits and ask ‘what objective are we trying to achieve with mammograms?’ A quantifiable answer to that would definitely refine the responses and expose the charlatans in the ensuing discussion. But that kind of process makes it much harder to manage the sheeple. (For more, google ‘Principled Negotiation’ or here on RR.)
Tonight at the Grass Valley Veterans Center is the Oathkeepers presentation given by co-founder Stewart Rhodes that I reported on last Friday.
Administrivia – I’m now in the heat of finalizing the test and solution versions of TechTest2013 that always requires a lot of equations and figures (see past tests here). The test will be given at NUHS on 23 March 2013. Until this effort is put to bed, I may be a bit tardy in my usually pithy comment responses, and also infrequent in new postings of the high quality RR readers have come to expect ;-)