So why do AGW alarmists say Joe Bastardi should not be listened to?
I found this dated back in June of 2011.
So, why do AGW alarmists say we should dismiss anyhting from Joe Bastardi out of hand if he can get this stuff right years in advance when the AGW models don't even get close?
- pegminerLv 77 years agoFavorite Answer
I used to read Joe Bastardi's blog on AccuWeather Professional almost every day. It was always the same (1) trash the National Weather Service and (2) promote himself. He would get forecasts wrong and never mention that, but if he could find an NWS forecast in error he would spend no end going on about it. I dropped my subscription to AccuWeather Professional because I couldn't stand his variety of self-promotion with very little behind it. I subscribe again, now that he has gone off and started his own company with other AGW deniers. (WeatherBell). They have nice graphics, but I still wouldn't pay a thing for his forecasts.
He is an excellent bowler and bodybuilder, and he did graduate Penn State with a bachelor's in meteorology, although my impression was that it was touch-and-go whether he'd make it through.
EDIT: I should point out that my distaste for him was due to his attitude and the inaccuracy of his WEATHER forecasts. I had no idea of his opinions on AGW at the time, and at that timeI probably didn't even care about that.
And jim z, reading his weather blog it was impossible to tell whether he was a Marxist, a capitalist, a Republican or a Democrat. Unlike you, I guess I care more about whether someone's science is correct more than I do about their politics.
- Anonymous5 years ago
I thought Al Gore was your scapegoat-in-chief... Personally, I think that various people are just either clarifying their actual positions or admitting to saying things that were 'alarmist' for speculating about possible dire consequences of anthropogenic global warming. So far I haven't seen anyone actually admit that there isn't a need to be concerned about even the more mild possible effects or that they were wrong to accept AGW. I think that this really has something to do with all the various denier ploys to discredit them by focusing only on their worst-case scenario claims in interviews (not in a scientific presentation or debate) and the addition of 'Catastrophic" to AGW to try and make them seem like doomsayers. _
- 5 years ago
We're constantly manifesting. Each idea we have creates an energy circulation within and around our physical beings. This energy attracts its similarity. So if you're thinking, "I suck," then your energy kind of, well, draws- and you attract sucks experiences and this is just among the important things that this book Manifestation Miracle https://tr.im/YU1lC will discover you. The favorable affirmations, when you impress a brand-new thought, concept or image into your subconscious, it ultimately becomes rooted in the soil of your subconscious.
Manifestation Miracle is extremely comprehensive and the optimal non fluff guide to the law of attraction and ways to utilize it to its optimal potential. If you are seeking a life changing motivational read then this guide from start to finish! You most certainly will not regret it.
- How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
- TrevorLv 77 years ago
If you read the full story then it’s very different.
In 2010 Bastardi predicted that the winters of 2012/13, 2013/14 and 2014/15 would be severe and his reasoning for that he believed was due to ENSO and the eruption of Arctic volcanoes.
On ENSO he said “"We have a cold Pacific now. We had a La Nina, El Nino, then a stronger La Nina [similar to the cycle] that happened in the early to mid '70s that set up the winters of the late '70s."
On the volcanoes he said “The last time we had arctic volcanoes go off, in 1912 - similar to what we had two winters ago - the winters three years removed got very bad across the United States," Bastardi said.”
Now, he said this in 2010 and was therefore referencing Arctic volcanoes in 2008 – of which there weren’t any, other than some heat loss from the Gakkel Ridge. The big Arctic volcano, Eyjafjallajokull, didn’t erupt until 2010. Perhaps Bastardi was referencing this and got “four months ago” confused with “two winters ago”.
Whatever it was, he was very wrong to suggest that 2012/13 would be a severe winter, temperatures were considerably above average. Only two states recorded temperatures that were well below normal whereas there were 26 that were well above normal.
As for this winter, he was right to say it would be very cold but for all the wrong reasons. He predicted that ENSO and volcanoes would cause cold weather and therefore his prediction is wrong.
Bastardi’s more recent predictions for the current winter have met with mixed fortunes. In October last year he was predicting that it would be colder then normal for the eastern US, warmer than normal for the western US and much warmer than normal across Canada. So he’s half right on one of these three points.
Just out of interest, here’s something Bastardi said in 2012, do you agree with him? “CO2 cannot cause global warming. I'll tell you why. It doesn't mix well with the atmosphere, for one. For two, its specific gravity is 1 1/2 times that of the rest of the atmosphere. It heats and cools much quicker. Its radiative processes are much different. So it cannot -- it literally cannot cause global warming”
On the plus side, the accuracy of Bastardi’s forecasts regarding Hurricane Sandy were probably the most accurate of all the forecasts. So, like all forecasters, sometimes he gets it right and sometimes he gets it wrong.
- gcnp58Lv 77 years ago
Here is a full discussion of what Bastardi said:
Note that he claims we will have cold winters because of a deep and prolonged La Nina. However, conditions over the past year have been mostly neutral:
Bastardi got the mechanism completely wrong, the cold event was not due to La Nina at all and he is a stopped clock that happened to be right once. This is why nobody listens to him. Except of course, climate skeptics. They like stopped clocks.
No doubt, you will ignore this response because it shows you didn't do your homework. Which is typical for a climate skeptic as well.
Now in contrast, here are some people who not only predicted the event (cold weather), but got the mechanism dead-bang correct as well. So they are 2 for 2 and Bastardi is 1 for 2, at best. Climate skeptics are like a group bizarro-world kids sitting around the guy who asks them "Which is better, more or less?" and thay all scream "Less!"
You will ignore this, of course.
- ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)Lv 77 years ago
First of all, who are the "alarmist" you speak off?
<Saracasm> Please listen to him, he makes a lot of sense "CO2 cannot cause global warming. I'll tell you why. It doesn't mix well with the atmosphere...."  </Sarcasm> It is as ridiculous as Muslims trying to claim that salt and fresh water do not mix well 
"It is clear that they think Joe is a mortal threat to the AGW scam and he must be suppressed." No Sagebrush, I think his "science" should be brought out in the open, that is why I posted and provided a link to it.
Quotes by Nazi lover Sagebrush:
"Execute all those who voted for OBAMA",
"Sustainability is a codeword for communism",
"Hire the handicapped, they are fun to watch""
"Justice and equality are codewords for communism"
"God has his hand on the thermostat"
So while it is obvious what kind of person Sagebrush is, if we were to use his "logic"  it would make ALL deniers, Nazi loving, justice, equality and sustainability hating, religious extremists. Although it would not be unreasonable to assume that his fans  are.Source(s): 1) http://mediamatters.org/blog/2012/03/09/fox-news-s... 2) http://www.islam-guide.com/ch1-1-e.htm 3) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Association_fallacy 4) http://malaysia.answers.yahoo.com/activity/network...
- GringoLv 67 years ago
<<So why do AGW alarmists say Joe Bastardi should not be listened to? >>
Because he frequently gets the Basic Science very wrong.
"He is a private sector meteorologist. His clients can judge whether or not he is good at forecasting the weather (he probably does a credible job). However, when it comes to science and climate change, his public statements on the subject imply to me that he does not understand the very basics of the science. His statement regarding carbon dioxide and the first law of thermodynamics is a particular whopper. His only academic credential is a B.S. in Meteorology from Penn State in 1978. Fox News needs to find a more credible spokesperson."
Kerry Emanuel, atmospheric scientist at MIT:
"I might point out that Bastardi’s background is in weather forecasting, not climate science. Asking him to comment on the science of climate change is rather like asking a country doctor to comment on the latest developments in biomedical research. The media really ought to know better."
Scientific American: "Fox Commentator Distorts Physics"
Wrongly claimed (on Fox News) that satellite temperature data is not adjusted. It is.
He completely failed in his 2011 Arctic Sea Ice extend predictions (as did Anthony Watts).
Misinformed/mislead his Twitter followers about Arctic Ice by showing a map with sea surface temperatures while suggesting it showed ice extension (and extensively covered by myself here: http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=201209... ).
Bastardi is a self-aggrandizing weatherman who wrongly believes his meteorology expertise is applicable to climate science and who does really well in TV appearances, particularly if the interviewer (like Bastardi) has not got a clue what he is talking about.Source(s): http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2011/08/18/299067... http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/degrees-of-fre... http://www.skepticalscience.com/one-confusedi-bast...
- SagebrushLv 77 years ago
They are afraid of the truth. I don't know much about him. But I do know that he said, in essence, "The Earth has been hotter and the Earth has been colder and there has been no global calamity." In my book, the man knows what he is doing.
And at least he hasn't been caught in an outright lie like many of the contributors on this site have.
The many contributors on this site are just clearly following Goebbels' policy.
“If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it. The lie can be maintained only for such time as the State can shield the people from the political, economic and/or military consequences of the lie. It thus becomes vitally important for the State to use all of its powers to repress dissent, for the truth is the mortal enemy of the lie, and thus by extension, the truth is the greatest enemy of the State.”
It is clear that they think Joe is a mortal threat to the AGW scam and he must be suppressed.
- 7 years ago
So he guessed right once. He uses arguments that are scientifically invalid and repeats that have been well refuted. I might as well take advice from a tarot card reader