I wish you guys would identify where this money comes from that is supposedly showering down on any scientist who says he agrees with the global warming hypothesis. For a long time, the fossil fuel industry gave millions to scientists who denied the data and the consensus analysis, much as the cigarette industry paid some hacks at the Tobacco Institute to deny the obvious links between smoking and lung cancer. But who is bankrolling the GW people, and why? Today, even some of the fossil fuel industry corporations have come around and admit the problem.

Sonart (I believe) did a thorough job of proving the GW case in a thread here several months ago, but you guys apparently got bored and tuned it out, or forgot it. There is plenty of disagreement among scientists on the precise future trajectory of GW, but despite the nonsense spouted by the meteorologist in the OP, there is very little dispute that GW is happening and that human activity is causing it.

Quote:
The American Meteorological Society (AMS) statement adopted by their council in 2003 said:

There is now clear evidence that the mean annual temperature at the Earth's surface, averaged over the entire globe, has been increasing in the past 200 years. There is also clear evidence that the abundance of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere has increased over the same period. In the past decade, significant progress has been made toward a better understanding of the climate system and toward improved projections of long-term climate change... The report by the IPCC stated that the global mean temperature is projected to increase by 1.4 C5.8 C in the next 100 years... Human activities have become a major source of environmental change. Of great urgency are the climate consequences of the increasing atmospheric abundance of greenhouse gases... Because greenhouse gases continue to increase, we are, in effect, conducting a global climate experiment, neither planned nor controlled, the results of which may present unprecedented challenges to our wisdom and foresight as well as have significant impacts on our natural and societal systems. It is a long-term problem that requires a long-term perspective. Important decisions confront current and future national and world leaders.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sci...ate_change

Someone's lying, and I think it's the guy who claims that few meteorologists support the GW hypothesis.