01-25-2010, 11:49 AM
(01-25-2010, 11:41 AM)Benny2guns Wrote:what claims. that hes a weatherman. lmao.(01-25-2010, 11:38 AM)billy Wrote:Well i have not tried as yet to find out bill but maybe you might post a link to support you claims? In the mean time i'll have a look when i get the chance, can't be hard to find.(01-25-2010, 11:25 AM)Benny2guns Wrote: Actually the process is a long one, the court process I mean. I would suspect that if it makes it to court it will be long after we have moved on from the topic at hand. Just an educated guess mind you.i'll take that as a no the
pretty sure if papers to sue had been filed they'd have been plastered all over the news.
another fucking weatherman with delusions of grandeur.
he's not even qualified to make that kind of statement about climate change. he studies weather patterns 5 days old and even then he's the one who studies the weather. just more fakery from fox trying to get viewers.
the last time i heard of that clip doing th eounds was in july 09
and since then 30, 000 scientists can't file one lwa suite. now thats fucking funny
have a read of this;
The American Meteorological Society (http://ametsoc.org) has a great editorial about how it’s members only have basic training in weather
analysis and forecasting. The quote is taken from http://www.ametsoc.org/stationscientist/...torial.pdf
“The expertise of scientists actively researching climate
change is well beyond that of most professional meteorologists,
some of whom may only have basic training in weather
analysis and forecasting. Nonetheless, the public sees media meteorologists as experts. If we “experts” communicate
conflicting information, conveying personal opinions
with no scientific basis, the public can become confused.”


