WRAL WeatherCenter Blog

Fishel: Civility is possible in climate change debate

Posted October 24, 2015

Well, the past two weeks have been interesting. Not only because of my beloved Mets, but also because of the unexpected attention I have received after my climate change post on Oct. 11.

The Washington Post's Capital Weather Gang was nice enough to summarize and link to my post on their page. They did a wonderful job, but I do believe a couple of clarifications are needed.

First, "Ex-Republican" does not mean "New-Democrat." I became "Unaffiliated" back in March, and have no plans to alter my political status anytime soon. As I have stated, I am disgusted with the current state of our political system, and until some of our representatives have the guts to think outside the box, I will continue on my current path.

Second, I have stated for months now that one of my goals was to help promote a civil discussion between those who accept man-made global warming based on the evidence and those who do not. In the past two weeks, as much as I hate to admit it, I have gotten sucked into the fray. The political and ideological nastiness of this public debate leads to ridicule and accusations, which then induce a response. And those that initiate these kind of exchanges want nothing more than that nasty response, in order to perpetuate the conflict.

I have been accused of having an agenda, as well as being a member of a climate "cult." Well, I can waste my time sparring back and forth, or I can take the high road and simply pursue the truth as best as I know how.

I know some of you don't think science and religion are compatible, and that is certainly your right. For me, science is the discovery of God's creation, and that He sees nothing wrong with humans using their minds to learn more and more about that creation.

For those that say global warming is not based on science, I do have to say as respectfully but boldly as I can, you're wrong.

But in fairness, I have an advantage. My degree is in a science field, and I have access to those who have published hundreds of peer-reviewed papers on this subject. I can't be bothered by what Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, and others say about the science.

Now if you have a valid scientific argument that challenges ides that have been accepted for almost 200 years, I and the rest of the scientific community are all ears. You would truly be the Galileo of the modern age.

So in closing, I will continue my climate change "quest." I will share with you from time to time scientific evidence as well as some more personal thoughts. For those of you who in large part agree with me, that's great. For those who disagree but are able to express that disagreement in a civil and respectful manner, that is great as well. For those of you who choose to attack me and make all sorts of assumptions about my motives, your comments will fall on deaf ears. I cannot say I believe in one approach and then engage in another.

19 Comments

Please with your WRAL.com account to comment on this story. You also will need a Facebook account to comment.

Oldest First
View all
  • Dan Caugherty Nov 13, 2015
    user avatar

    What is truly sad about climate change denial is that there probably are sound, viable, conservative solutions to this problem.

    But we'll never hear them.

    Not so long as the majority of US conservatives deny scientific evidence in favor of "freedom".

    Passing up a leadership opportunity like this is questionable at best.

  • Roy Pine Oct 28, 2015
    user avatar

    Judging from the comments here, Greg is casting pearls before swine. The Independent had a good interview with him about his evolution on the position.

    Oh wait, I forget that most of the ostriches don't believe in evolution either.

  • Ncsu Ninetytwo Oct 28, 2015
    user avatar

    Greg...the 98% scientific consensus on man-made global warming is a hoax...............The American Geophysical Union survey of 3,000 scientists was paired down to 75 YES/2 NO answers to get their 98% statistic.....2,923 answers were discarded. ....That is called CHERRY PICKING DATA................

    http://www.forbes.com/sites/larrybell/2012/07/17/that-scientific-global-warming-consensus-not/

    ...and you can't even predict the triangle weather very reliably 3 days out. Your predictions are a running joke in our household.

  • Sick Ofhollywood Oct 28, 2015
    user avatar

    Fishel - you are the biggest phony I've yet to see. Almost never are your forecast as accurate as other sources. This is simply the truth. There are multiple scientist that are confident enough to publish true science, and grants continue to flow in. From Time magazines "The coming ice age", to where we are today, might want to consult someone who has the science and not some phony spreadsheet that impresses the trailer trash that is most your viewers.

  • Bubba Jim Oct 26, 2015
    user avatar

    Civility is possible as long as you agree with the Al Gore crowd!! There is ZERO evidence for man made global warming!!!!

  • Roger Connor Oct 26, 2015
    user avatar

    Since Battle of Trenton (Dec 25, 1776) where Washington crossed the Delaware, dodging Ice flows, to surprise the British, and the terrible winter (1777-1778) at Valley Forge, where the Continental Army lost many men to the cold and disease, it has been obvious that the climate was warming. On Christmas day 1956, the temperature was warm enough that I played outside without a coat. Several months later, I walked into town in 2 ft of snow. The issue has never been are we gradually warming. The issue is- why all the hubbub about it being primarily man-made, exactly what proof is there of that that can be definitively separated from natural causes and normal cycles, and why the panic of " we MUST do something " without the understanding of exactly what is going on. First it was the Freon was killing the ozone layer- then it was discovered that -no that wasn't true -although the governments stopped the production of CFCs. Lately it's the industrial pollution of CO2, but that's not proven.

  • Harold Norman Oct 25, 2015
    user avatar

    Good article, Greg. But you do realize that a great deal of fossil fuel money has been working against climatology science for decades. Exxon's own people knew it was a problem years ago but they kept publicly denying it and funding anti-science efforts. I like your ideas about new and profitable energy sources, but without some kind of government involvement, nothing will get done for decades more.

  • Ncsu Ninetytwo Oct 25, 2015
    user avatar

    Who Greg!.....You totally fell off the boat..........You are 10 years behind the times........Most of the LEFT are not using the term GLOBAL WARMING anymore. They are using the term CLIMATE CHANGE.......You sound old...........and yes, a PHD is basically a piece of paper that makes egocentric people think they are the smartest people in the room. It doesn't make a person, moral, honest, or intelligent. It is a club of people who like to work at desks in air conditioned rooms while getting free grant money from the government or wherever they can get free money.

  • Bill DeMott Oct 25, 2015
    user avatar

    The climate change debate that we need is over the policies to fight climate change. The scientific evidence has been very strong for at least 40 years. As a scientist, I am embarrassed that I did not recognize the climate threat until about 10 years ago. I did understand some of the science, but I just did not recognize that dangers both to human civilization and natural ecosystems until about a decade ago.

  • Bob Bruck Oct 24, 2015
    user avatar

    BRAVO GREG!!!

More...