Finally somebody with a rational thought.
Mr. Bastardi, I applaud your candor, use of logic and common sense.

The World Bank wants to step up its efforts to fight global warming. This ties in with the Millenium Developement Goals proposed by the chief of the UN. This is without question wealth distribution based on inconclusive, non concensual findings. Where is the logic? We are on the precipice of seeing an American, Canadian and possibly Mexican joined, Euro-type dollar...soon.

Dr. Bastardi brings up some basic and what should be common sense points. These however, will be overlooked by the over thinkers of AGW.

I honestly feel that many over thinkers who buy into the various AGW doomsday scenarios, actually suffer from some form of Schizophrenia. Seriously. They are looking at a blurry puzzle through a microscope, trying to get the pieces to fit, which in their convoluted heads it does. Stop looking in the microscope and look at the big picture. We aren't going to destroy ourselves by emmitting CO2. We've already burned 20 percent of the earths fossil fuels, yet we and the earth are doing no worse when compared to the past. Ocean levels have not gone up. It was warmer in 1939 without SUV's.

Perhaps they are all smoking from the same stock of THC producing plants(please allow this comment, its true in some cases). Please come back and join the rest of us in reality. I'm all for efficient energy, but come on people.

Joe tells it like it is. The substance of the argument is this: we just don't have enough accumlated data over time to make any "credible" conclusion on climate change. To do so is intellectually dishonest.

Heck, I'd like to see a 5 day forcast in the winter bear out to something that would be
somewhat accurate much less a 5 or 50 year climate projection.

So, Brett, are there any senior folks at AW that Katie could interview who aren't denialists? Just curious. Reply: I will find out Steve.

Also, since most of what Joe said on the only technical issue (Arctic sea ice) was wrong, Katie might consider interviewing someone who actually knows something about Arctic sea ice. The National Snow and Ice Data Center would be a good place to start. I think they can even do a satellite link.

Anybody who wants the facts on Arctic sea ice should have a look a this NSIDC page (and note the links on the right).

People who argue against climate change are the same people who claimed the world was flat.

Today is October 25th and not one leaf has changed color yet, I have pictures of the same trees with me in front of them 15 years ago where every leaf was gone by this point.

We have just experienced the Hottest October in Philadelphia and have not dropped below ZERO since 1994.

I don't need to look anywhere but my own backyard to know climate change is REAL.

it is very sad when people want to confuse us and make us think what's happening is normal or not proven, give me a break, I hope you wake up before it's not too late.

the interview was horrible display and a weak attempt at journalism.

Thanks Joe. It's nice to hear common sense now and then. Good point about doing research about the topic. Don't believe everything you hear. Research things on your own. The facts will surprise people. Unfortunately kids are being force-fed garbage. The infamous polar bear on the melting ice kills me. A year or so back I read an article that said "Starving Polar Bears Due To Global warming May Be Resorting To Cannibalism." I saw the article and said "wow I better check this out". Upon further research it turned out that one polar bear like three years earlier apparently had eaten another bear. I dug a little deeper and found it's not that uncommon for polar bears to eat other bears. How on earth could one polar bear eating another be linked to global warming? Well it was and that�s the kind of things kids are being exposed too. Unfortunately, most people believe what they read in the newspaper, see on TV, or read in Time For Kids. It's a shame they can�t.

I'd like to second one of Joe's first points. If I may paraphrase, his point was that current climate events MUST be put in the context of what has happened before. This approach gives the analyst the best shot of saying whether something is truly unique, or merely one additional example in a long history of similar examples.

Hi Guys;

Great piece! I've been following global warming and the weather for quite some time.. would love to be a storm chaser but am currently working in radio in DuBois,PA. Global warming worries me, not just for myself but for my grandson as well, what's ahead.. can we stop it? It seems like we're fighting a loosing battle or is it our destiny to let the weather and the world get so bad that it eventually wipes out man kind with more floods, fires, tornadoes and so on. What are your thoughts on just how bad the weather will become...

It's so refreshing to hear someone with common sense talk about this global warming nonsense. Way to go, Joe!!! Keep up the good work. By the way, where did all the hurricanes go with all of this record warmth in the U.S. Just a thought...

Lance

Sounds like Joe Bastardi is unaware that there are records of arctic sea ice extent going back to 1900 and they show a decline.

http://nwpi.krc.karelia.ru/climas/Ice/Ice_no_sat/XX_Arctic.htm

Also, somebody should let him know that the oceans have also been warming in response to to the increase in greenhouse gases. So, since the artic sea ice is melting from a warmer atmosphere and ocean currents does not alter the root cause of the warming.

Also, he should be reminded that CO2 emissions have only become the dominate climate driver since about 1950. Prior to that data, natural variations were likely more significant. CO2 emission were a factor prior to the 1950s, but were not dominate like they are now.

Yes, he certainly has strong opinions, and he's not afraid to voice them. Not much I can disagree with. He's right: satellite record have only existed since 1979, so we can't make many statements about arctic ice or other climate variables that are currently catalogued by satellite with any high degree of certainty. We can fill in the gaps with other methods, but we can't be as certain about changes before 1979 as we are about the changes since.

As he said: we don't own the Earth; we're just renting it, and we need to keep it in good shape for the tenants that occupy the planet after we are gone. And for most ways of doing that, there are more benefits than just reducing the amount of CO2 we put in the atmosphere. Increasing fuel economy reduces our demand for oil. Increasing energy efficiency of homes and home appliances not only reduces energy demand and the need to build more power plants, but it decreases electricity and heating and cooling costs for individual homeowners. Developing wind, solar, and other alternative energy sources reduces air pollution and makes the national power grid more flexible and less vulnerable to disruption (from nature or from terrorists). Preventing hazardous chemicals and radiation from entering our biosphere keeps the environment healthy and keeps us healthy since we rely so much on the natural world around us for all our needs.

Such measures have benefits far beyond CO2 reductions and should be aggressively pursued either way. If it turns out that CO2 is having a significant effect on global climate after all, we will have already taken great strides toward mitigating the consequences.

Thank God for Joe Bastardi and Accuweather! I used to use the Weather Channel as my browser home page but went in search of something else because of their extreme bias.

Excellent interview with someone that knows weather. Very refreshing to see common sense prevail in a subject that constantly is just opinion and conjecture yet you get ridiculed if you don't believe what they are selling. Thanks Joe.

Some good reminders of how much the weather (and life in general) has improved over the last 150 years.
http://www.livinghistoryfarm.org/farminginthe30s/water_02.html
http://www.kancoll.org/khq/1946/46_2_malin.htm
http://www.ks.nrcs.usda.gov/about/ks_history/page_4.html
http://kidd.park.edu/debramcarthur/photo.htm
http://www.1900storm.com/
http://library.thinkquest.org/C003603/english/flooding/tenworst.shtml

Alan Lockwood, you might have a look over at Real Climate for that sort of information. It's run by a group of climate scientists.

------------------

Yes, Joe knows weather. Climate, not so much.

Andrew linked to some useful information (yes, actual data), and there's plenty more in the same vein at the NSIDC site I linked above. This recent NSIDC paper (not a permanent link, unfortunately) analyzes ice trends going back about fifty years.

Another detail that Joe may want to know about is that Greenland snowfall this summer was much below normal. How'd that happen?

Finally, he confused the Arctc Oscillation (AO) with the Atlantic Meridional Oscillation (AMO). Understandable, I suppose.

Mr. Bastardi has a lot of courgage to face the political wind on this one. He is exactly right. God bless him. The so called "climate change crisis" is nothing more than a power grab by government to gain further control over what private citizens can and cannot do.

Joe's very interesting and enthusiastic for such a topic on Meteorology. Very well done on the common sense and understanding that everything happens in cycles from the past. Common sense #2, we cannot measure what we don't have from the past.
It seems that other weather companies use future weather predictions as a form of fear and mass media manipulations for political/governmental pull and/or power.

Joe tells it how it is, something very beautiful and rare in this day and age.

michael seitzinger:
"People who argue against climate change are the same people who claimed the world was flat."

Wow. They must be getting pretty long in the tooth at this stage...

michael seitzinger, do you have any photos of those trees from 30 years ago? 50 years? 100 years ago? I believe you just help prove Joe's point.

Thank you Katie and Joe....a streightforward and easy to understand interview. We here in southern new england have had a remarkably cool and pleasant summer with a nice round of Indian Summer in October,it happens, with seasonably cool temps arriving. Killer frosts have just started about a week ago, and the Leaves are just stunning this year! Apple Harvest in our region has been a bumper crop, and I have to put wood in the stove this morning, Brrr :)

Wow, a scientist who doesn't buy the AGW theory! How refreshing to hear his common sense views on global warming. I was particularly impressed by the reality check he pointed to concerning satellite data becoming available only since 1979.

Thank you Dr. Bastardi and thank you AccuWeather for restoring some sanity to this, mostly political, discussion.

I can't wait to hear his views on the non-existent 2007 hurricane season. The AGW faithful would have us believe that it's impossible not to have more frequent and more severe hurricanes what with all the warming that is occurring.

This blog can be so disheartening at times. It's gotten oddly political lately. (Emphasis on odd.) Why is RICH talking about an American-Canadian-Mexican dollar? In what way is that weather related? Why is the TV weatherman (Bastardi on Weatherworld on WPSX) talkng about climate? Meteorology is not climatology even if you like what Bastardi says.

But, then I remember that this place is really the last safe haven for people who choose to continue to deny and mock what they refuse to accept. Like when RICH implies that one would surely have to be a habitual user of cannibus to believe that humans are causing global warming. Brett, what's wrong with you that you allow a comment like that to get posted? (Reply: He is free to his opinion, just like you are. Brett. )In what way is it helpful, or again, related to issues of climate?

Then again, what else should I expect from a source of Wikiality like this one? Realizing that outside the finite universe of this mutual admiration and misdirection society, the world's important adults are finally admitting we all have a problem typically makes me feel better. As does the fact that as society advances, the folks who populate this wikiality are increasingly finding that their reality consists only of the highly confined space in this blog.

Yell and scream in this little blog until your collective throats are hoarse, but you aren't going to stop the train, deniers. You're too late.

Whether the warming we have seen over the last 100 years will continue or not, I cannot say, but Joe Bastardi reminds me a lot of the great Richard Feynman (and not just because of the accent) when he encourages us to stop accepting science dogma fed through corporate-run entertainment companies, and research these things ourselves.

I couldn't help but think of Feynman's role uncovering the Shuttle's O-ring deficiencies while serving on the Rogers Commission listening to Joe.

Whether or not we take the theory of AGW as some article of faith (as many activists appear obsessed with) or not is besides the point. If we want to come to any conclusions, must all strive to understand the underlying science and weigh the evidence ourselves, and then act accordingly.

Anybody who ever studied any science knows this, and I think this is what irks many about the political overtones that come from both sides of this debate, particularly the pro AGW side.

Thank you Joe!

Making the assumption because your leaves have not fallen yet and that October has been exceptionally warm is due to GW is like saying a stiff breeze is due to a hurricane. You've been on the earth less time then the earth has been in existince (unless you are really old). What makes you think your obsevation carries any weight. Using your logic if November is the coldest month in a long time will it be due to global cooling?

Please!