Weather Channel Founder planning to sue Al Gore to expose 'the fraud of global warming'

[lovuian]

Weather Channel Founder planning to sue Al Gore to expose 'the fraud of global warming'
http://www.global-report.com/vikijournal/?l=en&a=157374

The Weather Channel has lost its way, according to John Coleman, who founded the channel in 1982. Coleman told an audience at the 2008 International Conference on Climate Change on March 3 in New York that he is highly critical of global warming alarmism.

The Weather Channel has been an outlet for global warming alarmism. In December 2006, The Weather Channel’s Heidi Cullen argued on her blog that weathercasters who had doubts about human influence on global warming should be punished with decertification by the American Meteorological Society.

Coleman also told the audience his strategy for exposing what he called “the fraud of global warming.” He advocated suing those who sell carbon credits, which would force global warming alarmists to give a more honest account of the policies they propose.

more...

The Owner of the Weather Channel must have turned scientist
All I know is the Antartic is melting at increased pace

[begin_within]

1. John Coleman is a boob and an ass.

He's on the KUSI evening news in San Diego Monday through Friday and he is locally infamous for his silliness including saying Kay-YOOUUUU-Ess-Eye! (One time I laughed out loud when he choked on it and all he could manage was "Kay-You...cough...hack..." And he says, "the breeeEEEEEEZE!" and also makes a big point of leaving the set after his last Friday evening telcast by literally jumping out of the camera's range. He is always saying, "No! More! Rain!" even though we desperately need every drop of rain we get in San Diego. And last summer when it was 108 at my house, he said, "this heat wave, well, at least some people are claming we're having a heat wave." He lives an air-conditioned life and has no clue as to what the real weather is outside. For one of the co-founders of the Weather Channel to be a climate change denier is the peak of absurdity.

[lovuian]

4. He is a egotistical idiot

Its scary to see this Idiot in charge of the Weather channel

[begin_within]

10. He's not affiliated with TWC any more, in fact he was only there for the first year

Rumors go around that he was forced out, but he won't comment about it.

[Yukari Yakumo]

17. From Wikipedia:

He then founded The Weather Channel, serving as its CEO and President during the startup and its first year of operation. After being forced out at TWC, Coleman became weather anchor at WCBS-TV in New York and then at WMAQ-TV in Chicago, before moving to Southern California to join the independent television station, KUSI-TV in San Diego, in what Coleman fondly calls, "his retirement job".

[LiberalFighter]

8. Can someone cut the power to his home? Or better yet...

incapacitate his central air.

[htuttle]

12. I know a guy who might be able to take care of that...

[theoldman]

2. You can sue all you want.

The difficulty comes in collecting, especially if you don't have reliable facts to back you up. I don't think Al Gore will lose any sleep over this.

[no_hypocrisy]

3. Good. Let the facts of global warming be challenged and read into the record.

[lovuian]

6. Ya let the satellite images of ice melting in Artic and Anartica

be shown Let the sea rises levels be seen The Maldives are going under water

Ya lets here the FACTS

[lonestarnot]

5. Bet that fucker has a thousand points of light.

The lawsuit should be shear entertainment! Can't wait. File you stupid motherfucker!

[msongs]

7. weather channel is the worst place online for weather - bloated with ads and cookies nt

[kestrel91316]

9. He needs to go up to Greenland and Alaska and tell the locals they are imagining

things. Then he needs to go down to Antarctica and have a word with the penguins about the mess down there. When he's done, we can fit him out with some scuba gear and he can have a chat with the coral reefs.

For a finale we can bring him to Los Angeles for THIS:

[dysfunctional press]

11. "planning to sue"??? he may be an idiot, but john coleman isn't stupid...

the article says that he "advocated" suing, but somehow the author read that as "planning"...i think he was just blowing hot air.

[Jacobin]

13. Good. This could be like the Scopes Monkey Trial

I sincerely hope he does

[Warren Stupidity]

14. I'm still trying to figure out how Gore is responsible for the ICCC report.

I had some false-noise infected acquaintances relate (regarding this same nonsense) that 'gore was going to be sued for his faulty research'. I noted that they ought ot turn false noise off and observed that Mr. Gore doesn't actually do any research. They changed the subject and by some odd coincidence started talking about a polar bear at the local city zoo, at which point it just fell out of my mouth that 'soon that will be about the only place you will be able to actually see a polar bear'. At that point it was about the most uncomfortable car ride I've had in decades. These clowns are all ditto heads. They do not expect to be challenged on their bullshit, they expect only back slaps and attaboys. When somebody calls them on their bullshit they get a bit stunned.

[spanone]

15. what a fucking idiot

[earth mom]

16. Many Meteorologists don't believe in Global Warming because they are fundies.

:puke:

[Swamp Rat]

18. John Coleman is a broadcast meteorologist, not a climatologist.

He is not a scientist. Coleman has a personal political, and economically driven agenda... he is a man with an opinion trying to make a buck off of it. At best, he is an entertainer, like Glenn Beck. :eyes:

[ljm2002]

19. Might be a good thing, actually...

...because in a court they would be forced to put facts on the table. Might end up publicizing how lopsided the thinking is on this issue -- a huge preponderance of the evidence, and a huge preponderance of actual climate scientists, put the primary cause of global warming right at the feet of human activity.

Of course, no doubt the plaintiff would use it as a venue to promote flat-out lies. As we know, publicly repeating lies is a very effective tactic. So there is that risk. I'm thinking, though, that the defendants could bring in an overwhelming number of experts for their "side" (if "truth" can be taken as synonymous with a "side"), which hopefully would ameliorate the effects of the plaintiff's "side" (== "lies").

[RB TexLa]

20. What damages is he going to claim?